Global
Projects
Organisation
© BP p.l.c.
Security Classification: BP Internal
GPO Project Services
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
B01
Rev
Issued for Use
Reason for Issue
Glenn Earp
Author
Refresh Cycle Code (years)
Retention Code (years)
This document is copyright and
shall not be reproduced without the
permission of BP
15 July 2011
Date
3
Darryl Townsend
Checked
20 Aug 2012
Date
Paul Letchford
Approved
8 Apr 2013
Date
Expiry Date
Delete Date
Rev
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
B01
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Table of Contents
MPcp References ..................................................................................................................... 5
1
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 7
1.1
1.2
2
Organization, Roles and Responsibilities ...................................................................... 8
2.1
3
BP Planning Tools ................................................................................................................ 9
Set Up of GPO Primavera ................................................................................................... 10
Work Breakdown Structure ......................................................................................... 11
4.1
5
Planning Team Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................... 9
Planning Tools ................................................................................................................. 9
3.1
3.2
4
Implementing the Procedure ................................................................................................. 7
Key Contacts, Shared Learning and Feedback...................................................................... 8
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 11
Schedule Development .................................................................................................. 14
5.1
Project Planning in BP – Key Principles............................................................................. 14
Project Appraise Stage ................................................................................................................. 15
Select Stage .................................................................................................................................. 15
Concept Selection ......................................................................................................................... 15
Concept Definition ....................................................................................................................... 16
Define Stage ................................................................................................................................. 17
Execute Stage ............................................................................................................................... 17
5.2
Levels of Schedule Development........................................................................................ 17
Level 1 Schedules ......................................................................................................................... 18
Level 2 Schedules ......................................................................................................................... 19
Levels 3, 4 and Below .................................................................................................................. 20
5.3
Global, EPS and Project Level Coding ............................................................................... 21
Global and EPS vs. Project-Level Coding.................................................................................... 21
5.4
5.5
Basic Schedule Requirements ............................................................................................. 21
Master Control Schedule ..................................................................................................... 23
Master Control Schedule Interfaces ............................................................................................. 25
Simops .......................................................................................................................................... 27
Mandatory Milestones in the MCS and the Milestone Table ....................................................... 28
5.6
5.7
MCS Schedule Basis and Assumptions Document ............................................................. 28
Benchmarking – Key Metrics and Formatting .................................................................... 29
Quickplan ..................................................................................................................................... 30
Other Supporting Data .................................................................................................................. 30
5.8
BP Support Schedules ........................................................................................................ 30
General Practices .......................................................................................................................... 30
BP Commissioning Schedules ...................................................................................................... 31
BP Operational Readiness Plan .................................................................................................... 31
5.9
5.10
Brownfield Planning ........................................................................................................... 32
Interface with Activity Planning ......................................................................................... 37
5.11
Contractor Schedule Development ..................................................................................... 41
Activity Planning Process ............................................................................................................ 37
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 2 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Software ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Work Breakdown Structure .......................................................................................................... 41
Schedule Development and Control Plan ..................................................................................... 42
90 Day Lookahead........................................................................................................................ 42
Schedule Development ................................................................................................................. 42
Derived Schedules ........................................................................................................................ 43
Contractor Milestone Table .......................................................................................................... 44
Maintenance of the Contractor Baseline ...................................................................................... 44
5.12
5.13
6
Schedule Updates ................................................................................................................ 44
Resource Loading Schedules .............................................................................................. 44
Project Weighting, Progress and Forecast .................................................................. 45
6.1
6.2
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 45
Progress Limits ................................................................................................................... 46
Define ........................................................................................................................................... 46
Execute ......................................................................................................................................... 46
6.3
6.4
Progress Basis Overview .................................................................................................... 47
When to Measure Progress.................................................................................................. 48
Define ........................................................................................................................................... 48
Execute ......................................................................................................................................... 48
6.5
6.6
Progress Measurement Cycles ............................................................................................ 49
Contractor Progress Systems............................................................................................... 49
Engineering .................................................................................................................................. 50
6.7
Procurement ........................................................................................................................ 52
Progress Measurement and Reporting .......................................................................................... 52
Procurement Tracking Reports ..................................................................................................... 52
Expediting Reports ....................................................................................................................... 53
6.8
Fabrication and Construction .............................................................................................. 53
Contractor Progress Basis ............................................................................................................ 53
6.9
6.10
6.11
Construction Completion and Systems Handover .............................................................. 54
Commissioning Progress..................................................................................................... 55
Installation and Hook Up Progress ..................................................................................... 56
Installation Progress ..................................................................................................................... 57
Pipelay and Subsea Progress ........................................................................................................ 57
Hook Up Progress ........................................................................................................................ 58
6.12
6.13
Drilling and Completions Progress Measurement .............................................................. 58
Overall Progress Measurement ........................................................................................... 58
Define ........................................................................................................................................... 58
Execute ......................................................................................................................................... 58
6.14
Progress Curves................................................................................................................... 59
Early Curves ................................................................................................................................. 59
Early/Late Curves (Progress Envelopes) ...................................................................................... 59
Forecast Curves ............................................................................................................................ 60
Overall Progress Curves ............................................................................................................... 60
6.15
6.16
6.17
Progress and Manpower Reporting ..................................................................................... 60
Productivity Measurement and Reporting .......................................................................... 61
BP Monthly Reporting ........................................................................................................ 62
Additional Performance Metrics .................................................................................................. 63
Schedule Status ............................................................................................................................ 63
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 3 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
7
Rebaselining ................................................................................................................... 66
7.1
8
Project Governance and Assurances ........................................................................... 68
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
9
Recovery Plans.................................................................................................................... 67
Cost and Schedule Verification Review ............................................................................. 68
IPA External Benchmarking ............................................................................................... 69
Project Services Discipline Review .................................................................................... 70
Primavera Risk Analysis Schedule Check .......................................................................... 70
Acumen Fuse Schedule Review .......................................................................................... 71
Six Monthly Bottoms-Up Review ....................................................................................... 71
Project Change – MOC ................................................................................................. 71
10 Project Close Out........................................................................................................... 72
Appendix A Roles and Responsibilities ............................................................................... 74
Appendix B Planning Deliverables by CVP Stage ............................................................. 77
Appendix C Work Breakdown Structure ........................................................................... 80
Appendix D Level 1 Schedule Specification ........................................................................ 83
Appendix E Mandatory Milestones ..................................................................................... 84
Appendix F Contractor Schedule Development ................................................................. 90
Appendix G Contractor Resource Loading ........................................................................ 97
Appendix H Progress Measurement and Reporting .......................................................... 99
Appendix I Rebaselining ..................................................................................................... 116
Appendix J Schedule Risk Analysis Process ..................................................................... 117
Appendix K IPA Schedule Definition Best Practices ....................................................... 121
Appendix L Fuse Metrics.................................................................................................... 123
Appendix M Fast Track Projects ....................................................................................... 129
Appendix N Abbreviations and Definitions ...................................................................... 131
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 4 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Revision History
Amendment Date
Revision
Number
Amender
Initials
Amendment
* Only required for B02 versions and beyond.
OMS References
OMS section ref
4.1
OMS section title
Relevant section of this
document
Procedures and Practices
MPcp References
CVP stage
MPcp functional performance element
Relevant section of this
document
Appraise
Project Services
2.2
Select
Project Services
2.3
Define
Project Services
2.4
Related Documents
Document
number
GPO-PA-PRO00001
Document name
Description of Content
Major Project Common Process (MPcp)
Rev 3, 31 March 2011
GPO-PC-PRO00009
GPO Management of Change Process
Rev B01 18 Aug 2011
GPO-PC-PRO00013
Cost and Schedule Verification Review
Requirements
Rev B03 14 Dec 2011
GPO-PC-PRO00014
BP Standard WBS
Rev B01 29 Aug 2011
GPO-PC-PRO00017
Project Services Discipline Review
Requirements
Rev B02 21 Oct 2011
GPO-PC-PRO00020
GPO Project Review Meeting (PRM)
Process
Rev B01 20 June 2011
GPO-PC-PRO00027
Six Monthly Cost and Schedule Forecast
Review Procedure
Rev B02 19 Mar 2012
GPO-PC-PRO00029
Project Close Out Procedure
Rev B01 11 June 2012
GPO-PC-PRO00030
GPO Primavera Protocol
Rev B01 14 Dec 2012
GPO-PC-PRO00031
Benchmarking Procedure
Rev A01 20 Sep 12 PENDING REV B01
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 5 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
GPO-PC-TMP00017
GPO Standard Basis and Assumptions
Template
Rev B01 04 April 2012
GPO-EN-PRO00016
Integrated Project Planning
Rev B01 01 May 12
GPO-EN-PRO00026
Procedure for Managing ETP and STP
deviations using PMCS
Rev B01 13 Apr 12
GPO-OP-PRO00009
Operations Readiness Planning Detailed
Requirements and Guidance.
Rev B01 26 Sep 2012
EP SG 1.3-0002
Upstream Guide for Activity Planning
04 Sep 2012
EP SDP 1.3-0002
Upstream Practice Activity Planning
31 March 2012
Stakeholders
Name
Nigel Jones (Legal) *
Date Reviewed
21 Mar 13
Ewan Drummond
26 Sep 12
Paul Letchford
8 Apr 13
Donna Dombowsky
19 Sep 12
Jerry Bell
19 Sep 12
Ian Jones
24 Sep 12
Nick Kellar
19 Sep 12
Graeme Hall
13 Sep 12
Madhan Srinivasan
06 Oct 12
Alan Charlton
25 Sep 12
Ian Cummins
15 Sep 12
Rae Mullaly
16 Sep 12
David Lane
* Legal review required for all procedures and standards that are GPO OMS levels 1-4.
** SORC review required for all procedures, templates and specifications.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 6 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
1
Introduction
This Planning and Scheduling Procedure (PSP in short) is issued in support of GPO Projects as part of the
establishment of the BP Global Projects Organization (GPO). The overarching document guiding this procedure
is MPcp.
Implementation of this procedure will improve accurate, timely and rigorous forecasts and warnings of potential
schedule deviations or opportunities for schedule improvements. This will enable Project Teams to take timely
actions and decisions to influence the outcome of the project.
The organization of this document is the procedure mandating the requirements followed by an Appendix with
further guidelines, practices and examples to assist the user in understanding the intent of the procedure. The
Appendix shall be read in conjunction with this procedure.
All GPO BP operated Category A and Category B projects shall implement this procedure and adhere to
the requirements and practices therein. For OBO projects where BP is not the operator the procedure
should be applied to the fullest practical extent. Category C projects are not part of GPO and are
therefore excluded from this procedure.
All Category A and Category B Projects shall follow this procedure unless there are compelling, justifiable
reasons for not doing so in which case approval for a Deviation shall be sought from the Project Services
Director. Until such time as the PMCS non-ETP Deviation Procedure is issued, projects requesting
deviations from this PSP shall submit request to their regional planning leadership for validation and
forwarding to the GPO Manager of Planning for review.
The key objectives of the PSP are:







Define procedures on how to provide planning and scheduling services within GPO
Define the roles and responsibilities for planning engineers within the GPO organization or in support of
GPO projects.
Define a common language, terminology and formula associated with all aspects of planning and
scheduling, related topics and interfaces within the GPO organization.
Identify the interfaces and working relationships the planning engineers shall establish and maintain during
the execution of their duties including the GPO Functions; Project Services, Project Management, GWO,
Activity Planning, Operations, GSH, Partners, Contractors, Assets/Hubs, PSCM, Finance, IT&S.
Provide sufficient information and guidance to quickly set up a BP Planning Team in order to provide an
effective planning and scheduling capability from the earliest stages of a GPO project.
Identification and analysis of scheduling risks, risks analysis and providing guidance in establishing
schedule Performance Target and Not to Exceed contingency durations.
Ultimately, the key objective will be to provide the project planning services required in support of
delivering predictable schedule outcomes and on time delivery of production targets related to GPO
Projects.
This procedure shall serve as the basis for the BP Passport to Work, PtW competency assessment process. BP
Planning Engineers shall be assessed as to their knowledge in the proper application of this procedure.
A glossary of terms, abbreviations and definitions used in this document can be found in the Appendix of this
document (hold ctrl and click on Appendix N Definitions hyperlink to jump to the definitions. Hyperlinks are
used throughout this document to jump to Appendix/Guidelines/Practices. To return to origin of jump, hold alt
and press left arrow).
All references to Planning Engineers and Planning Teams refer to planning engineers working directly on behalf
of BP including staff and agency personnel and any contractor personnel who have been directly seconded to BP
and acting as a BP representative.
1.1
Implementing the Procedure
The principles outlined in this procedure shall be applied to Project Appraise and Select to the greatest extent as
practical. The PSP shall be fully implemented no later than the start of the Define stage. Projects shall be
assessed as to the proper application of this procedure via the PSDR, Stage Gate, and Six Monthly formal project
reviews. More information on these reviews can be found in the Governance section of this document.
Project Services Managers, Project Services Team Leaders and Planning Engineers are required to be familiar
with planning, scheduling and progress measurement and reporting of any active contract for project scope of
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 7 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
work, including but not limited to the Project Coordination Procedures (PCP) for their respective projects. This
procedure is prepared in line with the PCPs and shall serve to inform any subsequent revisions of the Project
Coordination Procedures by the Global Project Services Team.
Furthermore, it is a requirement of this procedure that all referenced documents listed on page 5 of this procedure
be read by the Planning Engineers as they are all integral to the proper application of this procedure. Except as
noted, all referenced documents can be found in the GPO library and accessed via OMS Navigator.
The PSP has been designed for a Project Team to use as the governing planning and scheduling procedure on a
new project. However, it is acknowledged that projects may need to supplement certain parts of this document in
order to operationalize the procedure for specific local or regional applications. It is expected that these
supplements will be enhancements to the core materials rather than deviations. Any supplemental procedures
developed by a project shall be made available to the planning review teams at the stage gate and six monthly
reviews for audit as to consistency with the underlying guidelines of this procedure.
Although this procedure should be used as a guideline for any BP non operated projects, it is not to be shared
with JV partners for any reason whether they are responsible for executing the work or not.
1.2
Key Contacts, Shared Learning and Feedback
Users of this document are required to gain knowledge from and share experience with fellow professionals in
Project Services at the Shared Learning System Website under Category 85, Planning and Scheduling.
Feedback on the PSP in the form of lessons captured and good and bad practices shall be entered in the Shared
Learning System where they will be reviewed by the relevant authorities and considered for future revisions of
this document. Validation of lessons learned shall serve as notice to the projects to adopt a shared learning prior
to the PSP being updated and re-issued.
General questions for the planning community should be directed to the eClips Projects Forum and/or the
Planning and Scheduling Community of Practice via the site owners.
Use Project eClips Forum to connect with others in the network, post questions and search the discussion area for
previous experiences. This link as well as the Shared Learning System is available at the Planning and
Scheduling Community of Practice, CoP website.
The Planning Community of Practice exists to:





Act as a focal point for the GPO Planning and Scheduling community to share information regarding
the implementation of the planning and scheduling procedure and the BP standard planning software
Primavera, MS Project and Acumen
To bring together a community of individuals involved in GPO Projects Planning on a regular basis and
to provide these individuals with the resources to enable them to deliver better quality, higher integrity
data driven project schedules
Develop a central repository of planning documents and templates representing planning and scheduling
the BP way to drive consistency and continuous improvement
Contain a list of all GPO planning engineers across all regions and projects along with their associated
planning software assignments
Provide links to key planning associated documents in the GPO library
The link can be found at:
http://gpo.bpweb.bp.com/COLLAB/PROJSVS/PLANNING/Pages/default.aspx
2
Organization, Roles and Responsibilities
The BP Planning Team is an integral part of the Project Services Team. In order for the Planning Team to
operate effectively, it is important for the organization structure to be appropriate to the challenges and workings
of a Major Project.
The Project Services Manager (PSM) is responsible for organizing and staffing the Planning Team as follows:


The PSM shall appoint a Lead Planning Engineer. This typically occurs during Select and may occur during
Appraise. This person shall act as the coordinator of the delivery area Planning Engineers.
GWO planning exists as a unique entity under the control of GWO and is not part of this procedure other
than interface management and Simops or where otherwise mentioned.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 8 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure





For Brownfield projects, the PGM and PSM shall follow GOO Activity Planning procedures and appoint a
Planning Engineer to coordinate with the relevant Activity Planning Schedulers for the integration of GPO
Brownfield activities into the integrated Area Schedules.
Depending on the size and complexity of the project, at least one Planning Engineer shall be assigned to
each major Delivery Team or Sector on the project, or for smaller teams, a Planning Engineer may have
shared responsibility for two or more teams. Each Planning Engineer shall have two lines of communication
and responsibility, namely ‘operational’ to the Delivery Team’s Project Services Lead and ‘functional’ to the
Lead Planning Engineer. A definition of these lines of communication and responsibility are:
 Operational: the local Delivery Team Project Services Lead (PSL) shall direct the day-to-day work of
the Planning Engineer.
 Functional: the Lead Planning Engineer shall provide guidance and instruction on the processes, tools,
reporting requirements and calendars to be employed by the Planning Team, including the requirements
of this procedure and interfaces with other disciplines. The Lead Planning Engineer is accountable
for the production of all consolidated planning reports and provides assurance that the Planning
Engineering process is being carried out in accordance with the project Planning and Scheduling
Procedure.
For projects in the early stages of development, smaller or less complex projects, multiple roles may be
assigned to one individual.
Where more than one Planning Engineer works within a single Delivery Team, one of the Planning
Engineers shall be appointed as the Lead Planning Engineer for that Delivery Team.
For the purpose of this document, Global Subsea Hardware is considered as a delivery area, delivering a part
of a project. Though the planning team configuration varies from this document, planning roles and
responsibilities are to remain consistent with this document.
2.1
Planning Team Roles and Responsibilities
The primary deliverable of Planning and Scheduling is to provide Project Management with the current project
status and forward looking information that identifies expected project performance and comparisons against
performance targets. The Planning Engineers are responsible to identify trends and anticipate issues that may
prevent the project from meeting its schedule commitments and raise these issues to management for
intervention when required.
The Planning Team is responsible for implementing and operating the planning and schedule control processes
set-out in this document and in so doing are acting in direct operational support of the schedule stakeholders who
hold the delegated accountability for the schedule. The Planning Team also has a functional responsibility to the
Project Services Manager for ensuring that the schedule control and reporting processes are operated correctly
and in accordance with the PSP and the Contractual Project Coordination Procedures.
In a Major Project with multiple Delivery Areas utilizing multiple Planning Engineers, the Lead Planning
Engineer is responsible for conducting weekly / biweekly planning meetings with the Planning Team to review
the current status, issues and concerns of each Delivery Area. This meeting requires the presence of all BP
Planning Engineers associated with the project where time zones permit or the use of telepresence when
required. It is strongly recommended that the regional GPO planning leadership rotate attendance at these
meetings.
Lead Planning Engineer and Planning Engineer Roles and Responsibilities can be found in Appendix A.
3
Planning Tools
3.1
BP Planning Tools
BP’s primary software packages for planning are Primavera and Microsoft Project.
BP planning tools also include Microsoft Excel or Milestone Pro for summary-level, presentation-type schedules.
Microsoft Excel and Milestone Pro are used for creating the project Level 1 schedule as defined in this
document.
Primavera is the preferred software for Level 2, 3 and 4 planning (or other detailed plans).
Microsoft Project is reserved for special applications. Project Appraise stage and early Select stage plans may be
initially produced in Microsoft Project, but all subsequent planning will utilize Primavera.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 9 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
BP also utilizes Primavera Risks Analysis software for Schedule Risk Reviews and establishing schedule
contingency. Primavera Risk Analysis also includes a ‘Schedule Check’ feature that is used to check the integrity
of BP and Contractor schedules. Acumen Fuse is also in use as a schedule integrity and variance analysis tool.
BP Planning Engineers will apply Acumen Fuse analysis on a monthly basis to understand the integrity of BP
and contractor schedules and feedback shortcomings to the schedule provider and to analyze schedule variances
over time; what has changed since the last issue of the schedule.
BP Quickplan is a planning program that provides database information of historical data for past projects.
Quickplan allows a Planning Engineer to ‘define’ their project by type/size/ costs and is used to develop a Level
1 type plan for a project. Quickplan is a useful benchmarking tool suitable for Project Appraise and Select stage
work and when establishing the Schedule Basis and Assumptions. Quickplan is available at the Planning and
Scheduling CoP Website at the ‘Tools’ link. Where analogous projects exist in Quickplan, Quickplan is
mandatory for use in the Schedule Basis and Assumptions. Regional planning leadership shall provide
Quickplan training on an as needed basis.
eProjects is the BP Benchmarking Website that contains historical BP benchmark data including project
durations by CVP stage and is a useful planning tool for setting durations in Project Appraise and Select.
Included at the Benchmarking Website is a link to IPA reports for BP projects. Contained in the IPA reports are
industry standard durations for similar projects. This is also a useful source of information for early development
of schedules. eProjects benchmark definitions are included in the document GPO Project Services Metrics
Definitions (GPO-PC-PRO-0019). During Appraise and Select projects are mandated to use analogous projects
data when available from eProjects. Access to the data shall be facilitated by the GPO Benchmarking Team.
BP Shared Learning System (SLS) is another tool used by Planning Engineers to share learning and make
recommendations either because the contributor found a new and better way of doing something or the learning
showed the wrong way to do something. A shared learning is usually about something that happened differently
to what was expected. The shared learning system is also used to convey or clarify best practices or provide
inputs to procedures and processes. Use of the Shared Learning Site is mandated as part of the continuous
improvement process of this document. SLS is accessible via the CoP and Shared Learning Website.
BP Planning Engineers are required to be familiar with all of these planning tools and be proficient with applying
these tools when required.
3.2
Set Up of GPO Primavera
At present GPO have multiple instances of Primavera around the globe with various versions of the software.
Current instances include client (server versions) and standalone versions.
In the interest of standardization BP will be working towards having all GPO Projects utilizing the same version
of Primavera in a centralized location and using common codes, calendars, resources and templates.
The Planning Systems Lead is responsible for setting up the installation, connecting and securing users,
identifying and implementing security requirements, setting up the Organizational Breakdown Structure (OBS)
and Enterprise Project Structures (EPS) and general administration of the software in conjunction with the
Assigned System Administrators.
The Primavera ‘P6 Protocol’ GPO-PC-PRO-00030 Document, consolidating and standardizing the GPO
organizational and standardization process requirements shall be issued as a separate document from this
procedure in recognition of time requirements for development and the evergreen nature of the Protocol
document, as Primavera upgrades are implemented or new projects in new regions enter development. The
protocol document will be expanded/supplemented to cover any unique requirements of Category B projects as
they are migrated into GPO.
The governance framework for the P6 Protocols consists of three roles, the GPO System Lead, the Region and/or
Project System Administrator and members of the Planning Team. These roles are not specific to an individual
and may be carried out by more than one person or the role may be appended to existing planning role’s
accountabilities in the early stages of a project. Regional Planning Managers are responsible for assigning the
“System Administrator” for each project. The project specific System Administrator shall coordinate all protocol
requirements through the GPO System Lead and is required to be a member of the Primavera Users group,
consisting only of Project System Administrators and utilized to maintain consistent protocol development across
all regions and projects.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 10 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
4
Work Breakdown Structure
4.1
Introduction
Planning levels and sub-networks shall be developed in accordance with the project Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS). Interfacing the schedule and cost information through the BP Standard WBS (GPO-PC-PRO-00014) is
critical to determining cost forecasts based on time and to creating final forecasts. The project will ensure that
any project specific Schedule WBS can be easily mapped back to the BP Standard WBS.
Schedule development begins with development of the Schedule Work Breakdown Structure. The WBS provides
the foundation for defining, planning, tracking, reporting, and forecasting the project. The WBS assists in
defining project objectives and scope and establishes the structure for managing the work to its completion. The
goal of the WBS is to help ensure that all required work and only the work required is identified.
The project shall establish a WBS to:






Assign responsibility for delivery of the work to the correct team within the project organization
Determine, monitor, and report the project plan
Develop the project and monitor/report the performance through schedule status and forecasting
Report physical progress to Project Management
Understand areas of uncertainty or risk within the project
Support benchmarking of future projects; collection of historical cost and schedule data
The WBS is the key element of integrated project controls. A simplified example of how the project WBS
interfaces with other project control processes is shown below. Each of these processes shall be owned by
members of the Project Services Team (i.e. Cost Estimating, Cost Engineering, Planning etc.).
eProjects
Project Plan
/ Schedule
Contractor
Systems
Close-out
BP Mgmt.
Partners
Standard
WBS
Project
Reports
Project
Cost
Estimate
BP Cost
Database
System / SAP
Prior to entering Define, the Project Team shall develop and implement a project-specific Schedule Work
Breakdown Structure in line with this procedure for project schedule management and to integrate project control
and performance management tools. The project Schedule WBS will be developed to facilitate schedule
organization and progress reporting roll-up capabilities without introducing additional bands or ‘empty’ elements
in the schedule layouts.
The project-specific Schedule Primavera WBS will follow the coding structure included in this procedure and
include those elements specific to the project.
The Basis of the Schedule WBS is as follows

Project (automated on Primavera Project Set Up)
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 11 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure




Level 1 Milestones/General/CVP Stage
Level 2 Physical Breakdown Structure/Delivery Area
Level 3 Standard Activity Breakdown (Phases)
Level 4 Work Package/Discipline (User Defined)
Level 1 reflects a section for the major project milestones, followed by a general section to capture activities that
do not belong to a specific CVP stage (should be rarely used) and subsequently a node for each CVP Stage.
Level 2 includes owner’s deliverables within a CVP stage along with Delivery Areas. Stage gate reviews are a
typical example of what would be included under the Owners WBS. For example, typical activities under the
WBS elements for Owners/Project Management would be “ISGR” and “PRM” review activities or
Owners/Engineering Management “Engineering Discipline Review activities or Owners/PSCM Contracts
“contract strategy development” or “bid cycle and award” activities.”
Examples of Category A Level 2 Delivery Areas include Floating Systems (Hulls), Topsides, Subsea, Gas Plants,
etc. Since there are many variances on Category B work, Category B WBS elements will be structured to fit the
specific needs of the project while maintaining the ability to roll up as per level 3, below.
Level 3 WBS Standard Activity Breakdown includes Engineering, Procurement, Fabrication/Construction,
Transport and Install, Commissioning and Start Up.
While Planning Engineers are required to use the Schedule WBS to Level 3, the use of user-defined WBS
elements at Level 4 and below is advocated to organize schedule and progress where project-specific
requirements are not met by the Schedule WBS.
Each Type of Project, Delivery Area and Phase is listed in detail the BP Standard WBS (GPO-PC-PRO-00014)
and is not repeated in this document. The Planning Engineer is required to be familiar with the BP Standard
WBS document which can be found at the GPO Project Library.
WBS Coding
The need for the WBS coding development and standardization across the Global Projects Organization is driven
by the requirement for consistent roll up of schedules, standardized layouts, benchmark reporting and ultimately
portfolio management across the organization.
The Master Control Schedule primary ‘P6 Layout’ will be organized in Primavera by the P6 WBS and is
required to have the same appearance across the organization. A Master Control Schedule layout is available for
import in the Templates folder at the Community of Practice website and accessible via OMS Navigator. The
layout is also available in the GPO Global instance named ‘BP Master Control Schedule Layout’.
The MCS P6 WBS shall be based on levels 1-3 and as outlined in the Project Services Planning and Scheduling
Procedure.
It is mandatory to document how the P6 WBS structures contained within the EPS will be defined, documented
and managed throughout the lifecycle of the Project.
The following shall be available at the earliest possible point in the lifecycle of the Project.



MCS P6 WBS code structure with naming protocol and strategy for changing it throughout the
lifecycle of the project. Accounting for the full scope of the Project and the mandatory milestones.
Strategy for mapping and managing the contractors, consultants, suppliers, GSH, GOO and GWO
schedules’ P6 WBS structures to the MCS P6 WBS.
A master record of the WBS and a strategy for managing changes to the P6 WBS structures.
Use screen shots, charts and explanations like the examples below to explain how the P6 WBS is managed
within the EPS system. Also refer to Appendix C of the PSP.
Example: MCS WBS CODE STRUCTURE
This is a simplistic example of documenting the P6 WBS naming convention in a tool like excel. By using WBS
charts and diagrams the structure can be communicated and controlled amongst the Project Team.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 12 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Project ID
XXXX
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
M ilestones /
General / CVP
Physical Breakdow n Structure /
Delivery Area
Standard Activity Breakdow n
(Phases)
Work Package / Discipline
(User Defined)
M – M ilestone
G – General
A – Appraise
A – Select
D – Define
E - Execute
OWN – Ow ners
TOP – Topsides
STR – Structures
ANC – Anchoring Systems
EXP – Export Pipelines
T&I – Trans & Install
COM – Commercial
QUA – Quality Assurance
ENG –Engineering
PRO – Procurement
BM O – Bulk M aterials
DRM – Drilling Rig M odule
FCN – Fab & Construction
User Defined
Example WBS Code Structure
The following list includes the code structure to be applied when building a WBS within the Primavera Project
Master Control Schedule and supporting schedules when applicable. The codes provided in this depiction are
mandatory.
Any codes thought to be standard to projects and not included in this procedure shall be communicated to the
GPO System Lead for evaluation. Functional planning leadership by region will be required to develop a
consistent philosophy for application of user-defined and Level 4 and 5 WBS elements. Efforts to standardize
the P6 WBS structures shall be an on-going and this document shall be updated to reflect these developments.
There is a requirement that no empty WBS elements should exist in a project file. If a WBS element must be
added to a schedule later, the code structure will follow this guideline.
Example: WBS Code Structure in Primavera
The following example demonstrates a typical Master Control Schedule Primavera WBS for the Execute stage of
a fixed leg platform; jacket and deck with drilling module and accommodation module where Project “XXXX”
is the ProjID created on project set up and is the WBS default in Primavera. Owner’s activities for level 2 and 3
have been omitted for clarity.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 13 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Graphics depicting other typical WBS structure are included in Appendix C.
5
Schedule Development
5.1
Project Planning in BP – Key Principles
The primary objective of project planning and scheduling is to support the business plan. Meeting the plan is
achieved through optimizing the execution and completion of the project within the constraints of:







Health, Safety, Security and Environment (HSSE)
Quality
Risks
Time
Cost
Resources
Work scope
Completion and other key dates are established during the Capital Value Process (CVP) Project Appraise and
Select stages and are further refined during the CVP Define stage. BP’s approach to planning is strategic in
nature using top-down methodology and starts with a Management Summary and expands into more detail as the
project progresses through CVP stages. Management Summary Planning describes BP’s responsibility to set
overall targets and develop actions to achieve the targets. Performance-Level Planning occurs for the Define and
Execute stage and) describes the Contractor’s and BP responsibility to schedule activities at a detailed level to
achieve the targets.
Projects proceed in two phases with respect to planning. During Project Appraise and the early part of the Select
stage leading to concept selection, the Appraisal team under the guidance of the AGM performs most of the
work, sometimes with studies undertaken by Contractors, Consultants or the Upstream Engineering Group
(UEG). As a concept is being evaluated and put forward for selection during mid Select, the BP Define/Execute
team under the guidance of the PGM takes on the responsibility for all forward planning, and Contractors
perform most of the work with BP responsible for the overall plan.
The initial Management Summary schedule development takes the form of developing a Level 1 schedule based
on a combination of BP Management target dates, internal and external benchmarking from Global Projects
Database and IPA and other industry sources, risk analysis and team experience. The summary schedule base
durations are used to provide guidance to the Project Team and Contractors in establishing the boundaries of the
schedule and providing the parameters within which more detailed schedules are to be developed. The Summary
Schedule contingency plus the base duration is used to identify the preliminary performance target, PT.
Performance Level Detailed schedules are subsequently developed by BP and Contractors. This schedule
development is an iterative process and, as such, the first schedules are forward-pass logic based schedules.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 14 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Schedule integration begins at level 2 with development of the Master Control Schedule and the Schedule Basis
and Assumptions Document.
Project Appraise Stage
Early in Project Appraise, an integrated Project Appraisal Schedule will be created to reflect delivery of the
Project Appraisal Plan objectives. This schedule, which is produced on behalf of the Appraisal General Manager,
will cover the Project Appraise and Select stages (consistent with the Project Appraisal Plan), thus including the
intermediate Concept Selection milestone.
This schedule will set out all activities and key decisions required to support Concept Selection (mid Select) as
well as the activities required to mature the selected concept in readiness for the Define FM and the
Select/Define gate (end Select). Activities and decisions to deliver Concept Selection will encompass the
standardised concept identification, screening and evaluation steps shown in the figure below.
Project Appraise
Identifification of
alternative
concepts (within
context of a
regional
standard)for
screening later in
project appraise
Select
Concept Selection
Concept Definition
Screening of
concepts to develop
shortlist for
evaluation in early
select
Define
Evaluation of
shortlist and
recommendation
for concept
selection
It is required that on initial creation the Project Appraisal Schedule will reflect a best view of subsequent Select
activities; it will, therefore, be necessary to review and make adjustments (if required) at key stages, such as the
mid and end of Project Appraise and at Concept Selection.
The schedule shall fully reflect cross discipline alignment and integration and realistically reflect the impact of
interdependencies between activities, particularly those that straddle discipline boundaries, and will be the
primary mechanism for the AGM and Project Team to manage progress.
It will be required for the Planning Engineer to participate in development of the Project Appraisal Plan,
Contracting Strategy, Organization Strategy, Interface Management Plan, and Relationship Management Plan.
Select Stage
Select stage planning will involve a two-stage process, Concept Selection and Concept Definition. It is the
responsibility of the Project Appraise stage AGM to provide planning support to the Project Appraise team up to
Concept Selection, including team activities, schedule options studies and scenarios leading to recommendation
of a concept for selection.
The second stage of Select is Concept Definition where the responsibility shifts to the PGM and Define/Execute
Planning Team to develop the schedule of the selected concept to a sufficient level of detail to support a clear
understanding of schedule interfaces, critical path, and schedule risks.
Concept Selection
During early Select (Concept Selection), the Project Appraisal Schedule will have been updated to reflect
completion of the Project Appraise stage. The remaining activities will focus on evaluation of shortlisted
concepts in early Select leading to Concept Selection and maturity of the selected concept, referred to as Concept
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 15 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Definition. The Integrated Project Plan (IPP) is drafted during the Project Appraise stage and matures via a series
of workshops and option screening leading up to Concept Selection as indicated in the following diagram.
Project Appraise
Early Select
Concept Screening
Concept Identification
Concept Evaluation
Entry to GPO
Concept Selection
Initial
IPP Workshop
Concept
Identification
Integrated
Project Plan
Initial
Screening
Final
Screening
Updated Integrated
Project Plan
IPP Workshop
to detail / refine the
Integrated Project Plan
Updated Integrated
Project Plan
IPP Workshop
to refine the
Integrated Project Plan
The Project Appraisal group follow a structured workshop process for schedule development called Functional
Systems Analysis Technique Dependency Structure Matrix (FASTDSM). More information can be found on this
planning process in the document Concept Development Engineering Vol. 6 on Integrated Project Planning
(GPO-EN-PRO-0016).
Progressing of Appraise and Select stage is not conducive to the typical project earned manhour process.
Tangible progress will be measured and reported by two elements: staffing plans and activity starts and finishes.
Staffing plans will be developed for resourcing the appraise and select efforts and staffing activity will be
reported as planned vs. actual based on full time equivalent headcount. Activity progress will be reported by
cumulative activities planned to start vs. activities actually started with the same measure for activities
completed. This will allow for the variances that occur as schedules are being adjusted for the change in
directions that naturally occur in concept development and screening.
Additional status of appraise and select shall be captured by using the milestone reporting concept as discussed
in this procedure. Appraise stage milestones shall be established early in early appraise and reported in a tabular
format indicating description, plan date and actual/forecast date. Any slippage past planned dates shall be
explained in the Appraise reporting process. The same practice shall apply for Select and conclude with the
milestone for CSDM, Concept Selection Decision Memorandum.
Concept Selection remains under the scope of AGM up to mid Select when concept definition begins.
Concept Definition
A transition begins on Concept Selection where the AGM begins to handover to the PGM, and a Project
Appraisal Planning Engineer hands the work over to the Define/Execute Planning Engineer and Project Teams as
depicted below. Note that the Project Appraise group is likely to be running multiple projects in parallel whereas
the Project Team is dedicated to the selected concept. The below example demonstrates an offshore project.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 16 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Once a concept has been selected and agreed via the Concept Select Decision Memorandum, the PGM takes
control of the project, and the Define/Execute Planning Engineer continues developing the overall concept Level
1 schedule, the Master Control Schedule (based on current information, benchmarking, etc.), the Schedule Basis
and Assumptions and the Schedule Risk Model.
Progress for this stage of the project will be measured against the milestone basis representing completion of
each assurance review, including each discipline reviews and all other major assurance reviews. Project teams
may choose to weight base the progress of this stage but ultimately the progress will land a “punchlist” of work
to complete before the ISGR, Integrated Stage Gate Review and PRM, Project Review Meeting.
Define Stage
Define stage planning focuses on FEED engineering and early procurement activities, further development of
contracting strategies, developing executable contracts, updating and further development of the Master Control
Schedule, and activities required in preparation for Execute and Define to Execute governance cycles.
A key piece of work developed for Define stage is the Contractors FEED schedule, permitting, government
agreements, and assurance plans required to meet the next stage gate assurance process.
Key planning deliverables include review and approval of Contractor FEED schedules and progress
measurement systems, validation of progress, planning and maintaining BP deliverables schedules and interface
schedules, maintenance and updating of the MCS, review and approval of Execute schedules, contracting
strategy updates, preliminary commissioning plan, etc.
Execute stage activites may occur during Define when required to support the schedule but will remain under the
Execute WBS element.
Execute Stage
The Execute stage planning focuses on detailed engineering and procurement activities, fabrication/construction,
installation, hook up and commissioning and start up.
Key planning deliverables during Execute focus on monitoring of Contractor performance against plan,
Contractor and BP Support Schedule on-going integrity checks, variance analysis and forecasting along with
maintenance and updating of the MCS, adding detail as appropriate. Planning Engineers will also develop and
maintain project close out activities over the course of Execute.
Note: Detailed list of Planning Engineer Deliverables by CVP stage are included in Appendix B of this
document.
5.2
Levels of Schedule Development
The following diagram shows schematically the relationship of Levels 1 through 4 plans, from the management
summary in Level 1 through a detailed performance schedule in Level 4. The greater the level of plan, the more
detail.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 17 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
2011
2012
1 2 3 4 1 2 3
SELECT
DEFINE
P ro ject
Overview
CVP Schedule
4
1
2013
2 3
4
1
2014
2 3 4 1
EXECUTE
2015
2 3
4
1
2016
2 3
4
2017
1 2 3
OPERATE
Level 0 Schedule
M anagement Overview
Schedule (circa 50 activities)
A ppraise and Select Stage
Schedules, Integrated M aster
Co ntro l Schedule includes M ajo r
M ilesto nes, Key B P tasks,
Co ntracto r ro ll up. Generally 250 to
2500 + activities
Level 1 Schedule
Level 2 Appraise, Select and
Integrated M aster Control
Schedule
Detailed Delivery A rea Schedules,
Co ntracto r Engineering,
P ro curement, Fabricatio n,
Installatio n, Ho o k Up,
Co mmissio ning Schedules.
Schedules are generally reso urce
lo aded at this level. To tal activity
co unts will be in the tho usands
Level 3 Contractor
Schedules
and BP Support Schedules
Level 4/5 Detailed
Schedules
Deliverables list, Spreadsheet
Schedules, P ro curement tracking
repo rts, Expediting Repo rts,
P unchlist tracking, etc. To tal
actvities/reco rds co uld be 10's o f
tho usands
Level 1 Schedules
Typically, a project has multiple levels of planning detail. Management-Level Planning is handled at Levels 1
and 2. Performance-Level Planning is carried out at Levels 3 and 4.
Level 1 is a summary-level plan, initially developed in the Project Appraise stage, which progresses with
increasingly more detail through Levels 2, 3 and 4 through Select, Define and Execute. This increasingly detailed
sequence represents top-down planning.
Level 1 schedules are management-level schedules meant to inform management of the overall project plan and
once Define starts shall further inform management to project progress and forecast against baseline and any
schedule impacts on schedule outcome. Level 1 schedules are required to include:

Show key CVP stages, conveyed as one bar at the top of the Level 1 schedule adjacent to the timeline. For
consistency, the colour scheme shall match this example.
2011
1 2 3
SELECT


2012
4 1 2 3
DEFINE
4
1
2013
2 3
4
1
2014
2 3 4 1
EXECUTE
2015
2 3
4
1
2016
2 3
4
2017
1 2 3
OPERATE
Level 1 major milestones, including stage gates, site mobilization dates, cut steel, MC and sailaway dates (if
applicable), start up or first production dates, project completion and other key milestones as deemed
appropriate. It should be noted that the entirety of the key milestones will be shown in the Master Control
Schedule and hence are not all required in the Level 1.
Level 1 activities by Delivery Area, which must include as applicable:
 Summary activities as a function of and organized by Schedule WBS**
 Engineering
 Procurement
 Fabrication/Construction
 Onshore/Offshore Commissioning
 Installation when applicable
 Hook Up
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 18 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure



Commissioning
Progress against plan (progress bar overlaid on current plan bar and compared to data date)
Forecast of current plan bar against baseline bar (target bar)
**On entering Define, Level 1 updates will reflect progress from the FEED Contractor’s progress measurement
system and forecast dates from the Master Control Schedule. For this reason, it is very important that
organizational alignment be achieved with the WBS, Level 1 activities and progress measurement system.
The Level 1 schedule shall include a depiction of the data date, critical path, progress against plan and forecast
against baseline. Progress bars represent performance against plan as either ahead, on or behind relative to the
planned progress. For example, if the cumulative progress is one month behind schedule as indicated in the plan
vs. actual percentage, one month behind will be depicted on the bar chart with the progress bar ending one month
behind the data date.
If the progress shortfall is not recoverable, the plan bar end date will be lengthened to reflect the forecast finish
dates as will have been reflected in the MCS. If first production or a major milestone is impacted by this
progress shortfall and forecast, the issue is to be elevated immediately for workaround or other recovery
discussions.
Ultimately once in Define, all start and end dates will be taken from the Master Control Schedule for each
activity in the Level 1 schedule.
Level 1 schedules may be prepared in Milestone Pro or Excel, depending on user preference, but will meet the
specification as laid out in this document. See Appendix D for graphic Level 1 schedule depicting this
specification.
Level 1 schedules are mandatory for overall project schedule reporting. Complex Delivery Areas may require a
Level 1 schedule as a subset to the overall Schedule but care must be shown that all dates remain in alignment
with the MCS during Define/Execute.
One-off or proposal schedules, studies and other schedule tools which do not reflect Level 1 and MCS schedule
dates must be clearly identified as “Non Control Schedules.”
Level 2 Schedules
5.2.2.1
Project Appraise and Select Schedules
During the Project Appraise and Select stages, Level 2 schedules shall identify the current stage scope of work as
well as provide an overall plan for the Project Team. These schedules may be developed in either Microsoft
Project or Primavera.
Project Appraise and Select stage working schedules shall:












Provide schedule control during the project Appraise and Select stages – are used to validate progress
against planned deliverables
Provide an overall plan for the Project Team
Align the Project Team, functions, management and Partners
For Brownfield Projects, provide visibility of opportunities for alignment with the Operations Organization
activities.
Set the project completion timing
Set the basis for marketing and decisions and economic modeling
Clearly identify any early regulatory activities
Include scenario analysis for various concepts being studied, although these are often carried out in separate
schedule files
Establish timeline for decision processes and MPcp requirements leading up to Select stage Concept
Selection and approval
Set the basis for the schedule and estimate development and identify primary cost and schedule risks
Include Select stage concept definition activities including MPcp requirements leading up to the project
reviews and governance process
Include governance process and approvals in schedule for forecasting Define Stage Gate.
5.2.2.2
Master Control Schedule
The Master Control Schedule spanning Define and Execute shall be prepared as a Level 2 during the Concept
Definition Stage (late Select).
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 19 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
The Master Control Schedule, MCS shall serve as the one integrated schedule spanning the entire project from
Define FM approval to end of Execute. The MCS developed during Concept Definition shall become the
baseline for the project at the Define FM.
The MCS schedule:











Includes major activities and key team and contract milestones. Activity count should not be unwieldy but
may trend upwards of 1000 activities or more for particularly large projects. Planning Engineers should
keep in mind the MCS is meant for conveying schedule to the project team and is a summary of sub
schedules. Too much detail will decrease the value of the MCS.
Is underpinned by fully developed Schedule Basis and Assumptions document as defined in this procedure.
Fully integrates BP tasks and all Delivery Areas from start of Define to end of the project.
Utilizes cross functional interactive planning sessions to develop project milestones and key interfaces
Is fed by key interface dates from Contractor schedules and BP support schedules; shows all key Contractor
interrelationships and applies the appropriate allowances between these relationships.
Summarizes Level 3 Contractor schedules including Level 2 milestones, owners activities, engineering,
procurement, fabrication/construction, installation, hook up, commissioning and start up schedules along
with summary level GWO and Operations and Maintenance interface activities.
Clearly identifies the critical and sub-critical paths from start of Define through end of Execute. (Sub-critical
path means any series of activities with a float path leading to a key critical project milestone of less than 30
days or which includes an activity identified by Schedule Risk Analysis as having high potential to appear
on the critical path.)
Is organized as per Schedule WBS
Is suitable for extracting/developing Schedule Risk Model for use in Schedule Risk Review
Is the source document for all ‘one-off’ and presentation schedules including GFO, LTP, etc. and used to
contribute to development of business plans when required.
Shows Assurance Schedule and Financial Road Maps for each gate.
Levels 3, 4 and Below
Levels 3 and 4 cover very detailed working plans and are developed by Contractors and BP to perform and
monitor their work spanning all phases of a project.
Additional Level 3 and 4 schedules include BP created support schedules often required to support detailed
planning for owner activities such as MPcp deliverables, functional details, commissioning or other BP executed
works or site specific integrated schedules (including hourly Brownfield or TAR schedules when prepared by
BP).
BP Planning Engineers creating ‘one-off’, support or site-specific integrated schedules need to show great care
that any support schedule is continually synchronized with the Master Control Schedule. For this reason, it is
strongly encouraged that support schedules are only created by BP when absolutely required. No schedule shall
be created to replace the Master Control Schedule. In case of any discrepancy between a BP support schedule
and the MCS exists, the MCS shall be the controlling document.
Although BP Planning Engineers will help Contractors understand BP planning requirements, BP Planning
Engineers shall in no way be involved in developing Contractor schedules. Contractors are responsible for
scheduling their own work.
Contractor schedules shall be organized as per the agreed project WBS so they can easily be related to the Master
Control Schedule. Level 3 and 4 schedules typically:







Contain the greatest level of detail and include a detailed time-scaled, bar-chart schedule directly derived
from a detailed logic network (Critical Path Network), which shall establish the order and estimated times
by which activities are planned to be completed.
Serve as the basis for resource loading and establishing progress curves.
Clearly identify the critical and sub-critical paths.
Are fully integrated across the full scope of Contractors work, including subsequent stages, generally
reflected as a Level 3 or 4 for the current stage and Level 2 or 3 for subsequent stages.
Include all third party interfaces.
Include all major equipment and material requisitioning and ordering dates, manufacture and delivery dates.
Include all major milestones as agreed with BP.
Levels 4 and 5 detailed network, tables and spreadsheets provide further breakdown and detailing of activities in
the Level 3 network schedule and form the basis of contractor’s progress measurement systems. These lower
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 20 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
levels are developed and used by Contractors for monitoring and controlling work as required by Contractors to
better determine the durations of activities at Level 3.
Level 4 and 5 include contractor deliverable planning such as engineering drawing registers, schedule critical
turnarounds, revamps, detailed procurement tracking and expediting, mechanical completion planning, hook ups,
commissioning, start-ups etc.
Contractor deliverable planning is essential to providing a quality networked plan. Deliverables planning yield
the first indication of schedule delays. Planning Engineers shall not only consider monitoring schedule but shall
also monitor detailed deliverables list and status to support early warning systems.
5.3
Global, EPS and Project Level Coding
Global and EPS vs. Project-Level Coding
As BP moves toward using a common version and instance of the Primavera planning software for all GPO
Projects and a more centralized approach to file and data management, GPO Project schedule file set up and
naming conventions must be standardized for all regions. The BP GPO Global Planning Systems Lead shall
continue to establish working relationships with each region as they prepare to migrate schedules into the
centralized instance(s) of Primavera P6 Version 7 to facilitate a smooth transitional process.
The Global Planning Systems Lead shall work with the regional teams to ensure that Global, EPS and Project
Code structure are fit for purpose in support of the regional projects and Activity planning efforts while being
consistent with the centralization and standardization efforts as per the Primavera Protocol Guidelines.
At the time of the preparation of this procedure, standardization and centralization focuses on Greenfield
projects. Future conversations about standardization and centralization of Brownfield project schedules must take
place in parallel with the discussions of Category B projects movement to the GPO and will be the subject of
subsequent revisions of this document but will follow this guidance to the fullest extent possible.
5.4
Basic Schedule Requirements
A good schedule network is developed with sound activity relationships and a minimum number of constraints.
A common misconception is that planning software automatically produces a good model of a project with a
reasonable end date. In fact, what drives the end date is a combination of the following inputs:





Activity and durations
Relationship of activities
Minimal inclusion of constraints on the start or finish of an activity
Resource availability
Project calendars
It is also essential that schedules include sound logic that is based on typical project execution through FEED,
Detailed Engineering, Procurement, Fabrication/Construction, Transport, Installation and Commissioning.
Activity Durations
Activity durations shall be based on experience and sound historical data, benchmarking, productivity factors,
market conditions, and include allowances for all predictable productivity impacts. Activity durations assuming
“perfect world” conditions are rarely achievable and not permitted in BP schedules. Allowances must also be
accounted for in durations representing interface management and recognizing the inherent risks between
interfaces. More information on inclusion of allowances in schedule durations is included in the section covering
development of the Master Control Schedule. Ultimately, activity durations must be viewed as achievable by the
project and contractor teams to have any chance of success.
Activity relationships
Activity relationships form the connections that hold the logic network structure together. The three most
common types of activity relationships are:



Finish-to-Start relationships – the predecessor activity must complete before the successor activity can start.
Finish-to-Finish relationships – the predecessor activity must complete before the successor activity can
finish.
Start-to-Start relationships – the predecessor activity must start before the successor activity can start.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 21 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Finish-to-Start is the clearest relationship, and networks constructed using entirely Finish-to-Start relationships
create confidence in the dates generated by the analysis.
Finish-to-Finish and Start-to-Start relationships often include a lead time before the start date or a lag time after
the finish date (e.g. Finish-to-Finish plus 4 days lag time means an activity finishes 4 days after the other activity
has finished).
Planning Engineers often use Finish-to-Finish and Start-to-Start relationships inappropriately or as a substitute
for sufficient detail, giving rise to poor planning products. A bar chart generated by an inappropriate relationship
may appear identical to a bar chart generated by the preferred Start-to-Finish relationship, but the logic of the
former relationship is faulty and can degrade as the project progresses.
Experience shows that when the critical path contains Finish-to-Finish and Start-to-Start relationships, end dates
are often pre-decided by a Planning Engineer, who is forcing activities to fit in an available timeframe. This is
not an acceptable practice within BP. BP require plans which are not only of high integrity but also achievable
and predictable.
Constraints
Planning Engineers often use constraints to override an activity’s logic and duration-driven dates. Although
constraints may sometimes be imposed for legitimate reasons, overriding activity dates given by the network is
not a legitimate reason.
At worst, a Planning Engineer may constrain the end activity to finish not later than a pre-determined date, which
would cause the Project’s finish date to appear much earlier than the analysis would allow.
Good practice is to maximize the use of Finish-to-Start relationships and minimize constraints. Using nonFinish-to-Start logic and imposing constraints may produce an acceptable Gantt Chart, but when presented with
such a plan, the Planning Engineers should understand why the constraints are applied and verify that the start
and finish dates are appropriate.
The presence of good logic without using constraints is required when a probabilistic risk analysis needs to be
carried out on the plan. For additional information on risk analysis rules, see Schedule Risk Analysis later in this
document.
Should a Planning Engineer find a valid reason to apply a constraint, the reason for the constraint will be noted in
the notebook feature of Primavera, found in the Activity Detail window. BP Planning Engineers shall enforce
this same principle on Contractors as a required practice.
An exception to the rule to avoid constraints are when interface schedules are provided between BP and
Contractors schedules which do not contain schedule predecessors within the file.
Float and the critical path
Total schedule float is the amount of slippage an activity can have before becoming critical. Critical activities
have zero total float. There are two types of float, total float and free float. Understanding the difference between
total and free float is essential for assessing potentially how critical an activity can become.
Each plan must have a critical path flowing from start to finish. The absence of a continuous critical path
strongly suggests the presence of constraints. A negative float means that the project or an activity cannot be
completed on the target date because a constraint (probably at the end) is preventing the logic-driven date from
going beyond that date. For this reason, a plan must not contain negative floats. Negative float is a clear
indication that there is an issue with the schedule which needs to be addressed.
When a network is constructed using good logic and contains logic-driven relationships, the amount of float
indicates how tight the plan is. Low float activities are also called sub-critical or near-critical activities.
Free float is the amount of slippage an activity can have before it effects the dates of any succeeding activities.
Erosion of free float shall be monitored by the BP Planning Engineers as part of routine schedule analysis.
Target control baselines
Approved baselines must be established by the Project Team for cost-control and progress measurement during
the Define and Execute stages.
The project schedule should be managed in accordance with the baseline control schedule. Contractors and BP
support schedules (example: GSH) shall be managed against the baselines established in the Contractors and BP
Support schedule development process as this represents the Contractors commitment to deliver. The project will
continuously work towards the early dates as established in the baselines.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 22 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Communicating Schedule Interfaces Between Contractors
Communication of contractor interfaces dates will be a requirement of any scheduling process and are covered in
depth in the Master Control Section of this document. Interfaces shall be conditioned by BP before being
communicated to contractors and others and will generally be communicated via an interface milestone schedule
or table. As repeatedly stated in this document, vendor to contractor or contractor to contractor interfaces shall
not be directly communicated between contractors without BP intervention and control of information.
Schedule Contingency
When the project control schedule target end date is based solely on the critical path, the overall project duration
contains no float. Having no float can be compared to an estimate without UAP. Good practice requires adding
contingency to the overall duration.
Schedule contingency is handled the same way as CAPEX UAP contingency.
Schedule Risk Analysis, described later in this document, is the BP method for determining the appropriate
schedule contingency amount. BP guidance recommends a 10% to15% contingency duration above and beyond
the Execute duration to the Performance Target date for a typical project. Not to Exceed contingency may range
up to 30% beyond the deterministic (control target) date. Any schedule risks analysis resulting in a PT
contingency above 15% could be an indication that a project is carrying too much risk forward in the schedule
and will require careful analysis to understand these residual risks and whether it’s appropriate to move forward
without de-risking or otherwise taking special mitigation to reduce risks.
It is critical to note that schedule contingency is not only for projects entering the Define stage gate for approval.
Contingencies must be included in project schedules being evaluated in Appraise and early Select stages so as
not to mislead management about potential project outcomes. The typical requirement is to assign 26% overall
contingency based on historical trends to an Appraise/Select stage schedule understanding the contingency may
be driven down as the scope is better defined in the Concept Definition Stage.
Performance Targets and Not to Exceed Dates shall not be shown in the Master Control Schedule. These dates
are generally expected to be held in the FM and the Milestone tracking and reporting tools which are part of the
weekly and monthly reporting process. The project team is expected to work to the planned dates in the MCS
and should not be distracted by any dates which are not specific to the MCS. The risk of over running the MCS
planned dates is increased by showing the schedule contingency in the MCS.
To be clear, the Project Team works to the Master Control Schedule Control Target Date and not the PT and
NTE dates.
5.5
Master Control Schedule
The Master Control Schedule (MCS) is the primary integrated schedule of BP and is initially developed during
the concept definition stage in late Select. The MCS and all other BP-created support schedules will be built
using Primavera Enterprise P6 within the BP database.
The MCS ties together the Level 3 and 4 sub-networks to ensure the project is monitored as a whole. The MCS is
fed by key dates from sub-networks provided by Contractors and other BP support schedules and contains key
interface dates for the transfer of data and materials between Contractors. The MCS also contains key BP
activities including major reviews, governance cycles, and significant activities carried out by BP, including
PSCM, Project Services, Finance, Permitting, Subsurface, Wells, Operations and so forth.
The figure below shows how the overall planning process is integrated and the principle interfaces managed.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 23 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Project Services
HSSE
PSCM
EPMS Cont ract ors
Operat ions
Planning Team
- Define Object ives
- Prepare and Maint ain
Project Mast er Cont rol
Schedule
- Coordinat e Int erfaces
Global Wells
Organizat ion,
EPC Cont ract ors
Int ernal/ Ext ernal
Benchm arks
Inst allat ion
Cont ract ors
Global Subsea
Hardw are
Subsurface
SURF
Com m issioning
The Master Control Schedule shall be created by the BP Planning Engineer(s) in its entirety without merging or
otherwise replicating any other extraneous schedule files. The Master Control Schedule shall be contained in one
Primavera file, not multiple files linked together.
The MCS shall span Define through Execute as one integrated schedule with the CVP stages following the WBS
guidelines as identified in this procedure.
All planning information from other parties including Contractors schedules and other sub-networks and supplier
schedules including GSH will be conditioned as required and rolled up and inputted directly by the BP planning
staff into the MCS. No Contractor or sub-network files shall be electronically merged or linked to the MCS.
Detailed hook up, commissioning, shutdown and turnaround schedules developed by BP shall be treated the
same as a Contractor schedules and summarized in the MCS.
The Master Control Schedule shall be fully underpinned by a Schedule Basis and Assumptions document
produced during Select stage concept definition prior to the Define Stage Gate Schedule Risk Analysis. The
Schedule Basis and Assumptions shall be updated prior to the Execute Stage Gate Schedule Risk Analysis. The
Master Control Schedule, Schedule Basis and Assumptions, Project Risk Register and Schedule Risk Model are
the key documents required for the Schedule Risk Review and determination of risks, opportunities, and
schedule contingency requirements.
The MCS will be the source schedule for development of the Schedule Risk Model in support of the Schedule
Risk Review.
It is anticipated the MCS will continue to add to the critical and near critical path activity sets as required for
clarity and interface management over the course of the project.
The Master Control Schedule shall be baselined at the Define Stage Gate and may be rebaselined just ahead of
the Execute gate assurances if supported by significant scope or schedule changes having occurred during
Define. Significant changes to scope will require the rebaselined MCS to support the development of the Class 2
estimate and cost phasing for Execute.
As a minimum, the MCS provides:







An overall timeframe for the performance of the project and key activities.
Inclusion of the project’s key milestones.
Clearly indicate project critical path.
BP key assurance and governance activities; activities required by MPcp to be in place before stage gate
assurance process begins.
Major Milestones including all those which are part of the monthly and weekly reporting process.
Inclusion of all key Delivery Area interface milestones; key activities, constraints and milestones that
interface with other Delivery Areas and functions including Operations, Drilling and other external
interfaces.
Intermediate milestones; milestones within a Delivery Area that if not met would affect completion of the
Delivery Area (e.g. major lift dates on deck fabrication or site construction).
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 24 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure



A concise and accurate summary reflection of the underpinning Contractor control schedules plus any
conditional allowances.
Reasonable schedule float allowances within activities/between interface activities.
Service as a model to:
 Monitor schedule performance.
 Assess trends.
 Forecast completion dates.
 Perform what if scenarios.
 Form the basis for the development of the Risk Schedule Model.
For the purpose of this document, the MCS schedule forecast is defined as the deterministic dates generated by
the MCS upon updating the status of the activities as part of the monthly reporting cycle. The MCS forecast date
for First Production is the date to be input monthly in the schedule performance indicator tool included in section
6 of this document.
Allowances will be made in the MCS to address float requirements within activities and between interfaces
hence the MCS interface dates that may impact critical path should normally be later than the dates reflected on
Contractor schedules. Allowances included in the MCS reflecting an extension of a contractor/supplier duration
or supply date and are documented in the schedule basis and assumptions and the Primavera Schedule Notes
feature during schedule development.
Activity descriptions in the Master Control Schedule and all BP-created schedules shall be clear enough to stand
alone. There will be no duplicated activity names. An activity description, such as ‘HSSE Audit’ is not sufficient.
A more appropriate description would reference the facility/item/location being audited, such as ‘HSSE Audit of
Hull Fabrication Facility’.
The MCS is not a resource loaded schedule. Resource loaded schedules occur at the Contractor level for
generating planned progress curves, manpower histograms and a basis for Contractor progress measurement and
report.
Contractor schedules must follow the agreed WBS to facilitate role up of activities and progress to the Master
Control Schedule. The Contractor coordination procedures (contractual requirements) must include a reference to
application of an agreed Schedule WBS for the purpose of schedule activity and progress roll up.
Master Control Schedule Interfaces
The BP MCS, support schedules and Contractor schedules are required to have a clearly defined critical path.
The MCS shall reflect the overall critical path, clearly indicating where the critical path transitions at the
interfaces (engineering to construction for example}.
Allowances between interfaces are built into the schedules by design and are absorbed in the overall project
critical path. Allowances must be carefully controlled to preserve the overall project critical path. Allowances
must not be excessive to the point of extending the project to a duration which is not supported by normal
benchmarking and current norms (maintaining the overall duration within the referenced benchmarks).
Allowances will be documented where applied against an activity by using the Primavera Notes feature. Usage
of allowances will likewise be documented in the same note as to the reason for the consumption of allowance or
variance in duration where and activity is extended or decreased. Notes shall not be removed or modified over
the course of the project unless the allowance changes or the reason for usage of the allowance or extension of
the schedule duration was found to be incorrect.
In addition to this, there will be a need to carefully manage communication of interface dates to remain in control
of the schedule float. GWO, Operations, GSH, Supplier and Contractor promise dates are not to be
communicated to other Contractors without being carefully considered as to the implications and schedule risks
and without the explicit concurrence of the Project Management.
Allowances will be included when integrating GWO, Supplier, Operations and Contractor schedules. An
exception to the inclusion of allowances is when a schedule provider such as GWO provides a P50 schedule, in
which case the dates will be directly reflected and documented in the MCS if no other schedule is available.
Inclusion of drilling durations stated as P50 is strongly discouraged as this will cause a false delay to facility
successor activities and could cause facility successors to be late should the GWO schedule come in at less than
P50. The basis of GWO integration with GPO is a topic of ongoing discussion at the time of publication of this
document.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 25 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
It is not unusual for Contractors and BP Delivery Teams to attempt to use available float in their part of the
project schedule. The project must be diligent in not allowing this to happen and carefully control any schedule
float application and usage.
Float management and application of allowances is not to be confused with schedule contingency developed as a
result of the Schedule Risk Review. Schedule contingency resides at the end of the total project or after a
planned date associated with first production, depending on the nature of the project. Float management
principles are meant to protect this contingency and reserve it for the later stages of the project. Using
contingency early in a project is a sign of either poor planning or poor contractor control. The following diagram
depicts the types of allowances and risk that exist under the MCS and Contingent periods leading to the PT and
NTE FM promise dates.
The first production date noted on the below table is the MCS Control Target Date (master control schedule
planned/forecast first production).
First Production
Master Control Schedule
Contingency to PT
Contingency to NTE
Control Schedules
Include Allowances and Risk M itigations
Performance Target,
“PT”
Not to Exceed,
“NTE”
Schedule Contingency
Additional
Schedule
Contingency
Base Schedule
Scope (SOR)
• Design Basis (BoD)
• Technology Basis
• Execution Strategy / Plan
• Norms/Duration/ Historical
• Approvals
• Current Legislation / Policy
• Equipment Specifications
• M aterial Take-offs
• Benchmarks
• Single concept & strategy
Activity
Allowances
• Design Allow ances
• Normal / M inor
Weather Dow ntime,
Loop Currents, w ave
height, high w inds
• Weather w indow s
• Know n & Identified
Uncertainties w ith high
probability of occurring
• Identified Risks &
M itigations
• Normal Labor
Productivity fluctuations
• Weight grow th
• M inimal Scope
Adjustments
• Rew ork/quality issues
• Named storms (No
Damage)
• Dropped Objects (No
Damage)
• M inor / Local Industrial
Disputes
• Slippage
• Extra Ordinary Labor
Productivity Impacts
• Offshore specialty
contractors arrive at end of
contract w indow
• Determined by risk
modeling minimum, mostly
likely and maximum
durations plus know n risk
events
• “ Know n
Unknow ns;” risk or
uncertainty that w e
cannot reliably
quantify using
probabilities of
occurrence and/or
w here the severity of
impact is unknow n
• High impact low
probability events.
“Show Stoppers”are
not modeled
Additional Schedule
Contingency Will Not
Cover the following
• Force Majeure
• Major Changes (SOR)
• Polit ical Upheaval
• Major Legislat ion Change
• Bankrupt cy Major
Cont ractor
• Nat ural Disasters
• Significant loss of major
equipment (t ot al loss)
• M ajor equipment
failures (LLIs, HLV;
repairable damage)
• M ajor industrial
disputes
• Significant HSSE
incident
Note that “Contingency to PT” although not part of the Master Control Schedule may overlap with the MCS.
Contingency durations often overlap with ongoing physical scope unrelated to first production. The above
diagram is not meant to imply that the end of the “blue bar, MCS” is the end of the MCS schedule.
Applying float is also about protecting the overall project critical path. As an example, if a vendor or supplier
provides a purchase order promise date for a major piece of equipment in the future, the equipment installation
plan will not reflect the PO promise date. This is a plan for failure as it does not include any allowance for
manufacturing or vendor or shipping delays. In this scenario, BP will consider the longest lead times, which
generally fall closer to the critical path, and place a schedule allowance between delivery of the equipment and
the earliest planned installation date. The schedule allowance should reflect historical data, vendor performance,
market conditions, country of origin and any other factors that could delay delivery and, therefore, extend
durations. The allowance is not to be reflected in the contractor or vendor detailed plans as the
contractor/suppliers are contractually obligated to deliver to their commitments. The allowance is incorporated in
the MCS lead time duration and applied in the development of the MCS.
BP will not provide Fabrication or Construction Contractors with vendor promise dates. This exposes BP to
potential delay claims and is prohibited except on explicit approval of the Project Manager. BP will condition
vendor promise dates to include allowances as required before providing to contractors.
BP will not provide the Fabrication or Construction Contractors with the EPMS deliverables schedule or forecast
drawing or design information issue dates as these do not include design allowance nor do they reflect common
delays in BP review cycle times, which is a very common bottleneck in the drawing review and approval
process. Allowances will be made between the forecast delivery of engineering deliverables and the delivery to
site of the same deliverables.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 26 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Furthermore, backlog of data to the contractor must be considered. A significant float management issue is the
level of development of engineering information required to support the efficient start of a fabrication or
construction program. Starting fabrication/construction before the appropriate amount of Approved for
Construction (AFC) drawings have been issued tends to lead to longer and less efficient fabrication and
construction processes. Contractors will generally not focus their resources until they have a sufficient backlog
of engineering information and materials/equipment to work efficiently.
Theoretically, a Fabrication or Construction Contractor could start work on issue of the first AFC drawings.
Realistically, BP will control start of work dates relative to building a sufficient backlog of engineering data and
material.
Any BP support schedule or Contractor schedule that does not include allowances between internal interfaces
will generally not be achievable. BP Project Teams must make every effort to influence contractors to include
the appropriate allowances within their schedules. Quite often, there are BP deliverables to Contractors to be
considered in this process which should not be planned in an overly aggressive manner. BP interfaces with
Contractors should not be based on Contractor “required dates” but rather carefully considered and planned
handover dates supplied to the Contractor to allow the Contractor to proceed with their schedule development.
Schedule delays are not always about Contractor performance or material delays as many times BP can cause
delays due to late interface deliverables or introduction of changes. These risks are very common and must be
addressed when building a schedule to the best of the Planning Engineer and team’s ability.
Not building an allowance in BP promise dates to Contractors also exposes BP to claims and can have a negative
impact to the Contractors productivity should the Contractor plan to a BP promise date which did not include any
allowances.
To be clear, the communication of interfaces between BP-managed Contractors shall be carefully controlled and
managed by the BP Project Teams, GSH Team and Planning Engineers. As a reminder, there will be no sharing
of contractor files between Contractors or linking of contractor files to each other, to BP support schedules or to
the BP MCS. This is the only way to maintain control of schedule float between interfaces.
Float management practices must be balanced against the overall project plan to meet the business objectives.
Excessive float between interfaces can lead to an overall duration that measures outside the normal benchmarks
and negatively impacts the project. The Planning Engineer applying these principles must show care to place the
allowances in the right place and in the right quantity to achieve a balanced result.
When required, key interface dates, as conditioned by BP will be reflected in Contractors schedules through the
use of a constrained milestone.
Key critical and near-critical interface and contract dates will be included in the MCS as milestones.
Simops
The MCS, or any schedule for that matter, will not have been validated as achievable until such time the
schedule has been evaluated for potential simultaneous operations schedule disruptions. Construction programs
cannot be looked at in isolation. Other ongoing activities must be considered.
As an example, a project may have multiple Delivery Areas involved in installation/construction campaigns at
the same time in which GWO is conducting drilling and completions in the same field or where Brownfield
scope is being carried out on an operating facility. Of primary importance is that this activity is reflected in
sufficient detail in the Master Control Schedule to facilitate a Simops analysis.
The analysis is fairly straightforward once the entirety of the scope is integrated in the schedule. The tasks within
the MCS are coded to area, whether it is host location, drill center, onshore site, battery limit, etc. The schedule
is reorganized to area code to facilitate a complete view of what is going on at each area. If Simops appear in the
schedule, the schedule is reviewed with the appropriate regional functional team to determine as to whether the
Simops can take place safely or whether the schedule needs to be adjusted.
The initial Simops review should take place in the development of the MCS during the Select stage of the
project, prior to setting the initial baseline at the Define gate and should be re-evaluated at any change in
schedule sequence or timing. Key simultaneous operations will be listed in the Schedule Basis and Assumptions
document.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 27 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Mandatory Milestones in the MCS and the Milestone Table
Milestone tables are one of the most useful communications tools for relaying schedule information at the project
management level. Milestone tables are in a spreadsheet format, include a clear description of the milestone, and
include planned, forecast and actual dates along with variance.
Milestone tables not only are key informing tools but also serve a function in project internal and co-owner
reporting and feed data to weekly and monthly reporting. Recording accurate milestone completion is also a key
component of project benchmarking at close out.
Each project will maintain a list of mandatory and other selected milestones in a format similar to that shown
below.
A typical milestone table appears as follows:
To support benchmarking requirements and consistency across projects, Mandatory Milestones have been
developed for inclusion in the MCS. Where appropriate, these milestones will also be included in the
underpinning Contractor and BP schedules (where a milestone is a Contractor deliverable or interface).
Obviously, not all milestones are required in all schedules. The complete list of the mandatory milestones is
included in Appendix E. It is envisioned that project teams will identify additional milestones which will be
added to this list over subsequent revisions.
5.6
MCS Schedule Basis and Assumptions Document
During late Select Concept Definition Stage all projects will develop a Schedule Basis and Assumptions
document. The Schedule Basis and Assumptions is the key document used in development of the Master
Control Schedule and the Schedule Risk Model required for risk analysis and determination of required schedule
contingency. This section describes the mandatory requirements for the Basis and Assumptions Document.
A sample Schedule Basis and Assumptions document resides in the Planning and Scheduling CoP Tools as
Schedule Basis and Assumptions Template (GPO-PC-TMP-0016). Refer to this document for more detail on
structure, content and format.
Details of the phased engineering, procurement, fabrication and construction timings, including benchmarking of
each Delivery Area, must be included in the basis and assumptions.
Commissioning durations reflected in the basis and assumptions will be developed in consultation with the BP
commissioning team.
Any project requiring Brownfield work will include the basis and assumptions used in development of the
Brownfield shutdown-related durations. The Planning Engineer will seek inputs from the Asset Functional and
Area Activity Planning Teams.
Important to note: Regional Operations Activity Planning looks out to 20 quarters ahead to identify GOO scope.
If the Schedule Basis and Assumptions document is being prepared well ahead of GOO scope identification,
schedule duration must be assumed for GOO work. The duration will be developed with the Regional Operations
Organization Functional Planning Team, and the basis and assumptions will be clearly stated.
Schedule Basis and Assumptions for subsea components provided by GSH will be developed by GSH and
provided to the project for inclusion in the document.
Schedule Basis and Assumptions for wells; drilling and completions will be provided by GWO to projects for
inclusion in the project Schedule Basis and Assumptions document.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 28 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
5.7
Benchmarking – Key Metrics and Formatting
Benchmarking at BP is used to measure performance using a specific indicator, generally cost and schedule per
units of measure, resulting in a metric of performance that is then compared to other project historical data and
industry norms. Benchmarking plays a significant part in validating schedule durations and will be included in
the schedule basis and assumptions.
Benchmarking may seem to be a one-off event, but at BP it is treated as a continuous process in which BP
continually seek to improve their practices and performance against industry.
There are many sources of benchmarking data including eProjects, IPA Pacesetter and Close Out Reports,
industry papers and public domain. eProjects contains historical cost and schedule metrics for BP projects. IPA
Pacesetter and Close Out Reports contain industry cost and schedule metrics for similar projects. Internet
searches can lead to key detailed information, particularly around key contractor milestone dates or industry
papers on various project performances. Internet searches can often provide a broader view of other operator
projects or may even provide insight to past contractor key dates and performance on non-BP projects that is not
otherwise available.
IPA data is included in the eProjects Benchmarking Website and is another good source of historical data but
care must be shown when using IPA data. IPA historically has measured durations as ‘FM date to FM date’,
which have not always been synchronized with project phasing. The IPA Close Out Reports need to be read in
their entirety to fully understand the context and derive use for benchmarking. Some of the IPA Close Out
Reports contain actual durations for detailed engineering and fabrication that can be helpful, but ultimately the
overall durations from the end of FEL2, which is start of Define, to Sanction and to First Production will be of
the most use.
IPA aligns with BP CVP stages as shown in the following diagram. At each IPA FEL phase, IPA is looking at
the level of maturity of the definition relative to industry norms.
Often an explanation will be required to clarify significant differences in the facilities which may have driven the
durations or any special circumstances/delays. Care must be shown to not include major disruptions in overall
schedule benchmarking when these disruptions are rare events. A good example are political disruptions that
could not have been anticipated and require the project to demobilize to any degree. This is not representative of
a typical project.
Benchmarking is applied in two steps of BP planning: schedule development and close out.
BP uses benchmarking during Project Appraise and Select to set overall target durations. Development of the
Schedule Basis and Assumptions requires a more rigorous approach to benchmarking as this document underpins
the project Master Control Schedule. Benchmarking for the MCS requires that not only the overall duration be
compared to similar projects and industry, but also Delivery Areas be compared to account for the variances in
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 29 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
the types of projects BP execute. All phases of an EPCC or EPCI project will need to be compared to the
appropriate benchmarks to establish project durations.
The more benchmark data assembled and used, the greater the chance of schedule success.
The following is an example of a benchmarking duration from Sanction to First Production. Where sanction is
defined as the date of the Execute FM, and First Production represents first hydrocarbons available to market.
Note the benchmarking format and colour schedule were developed by the benchmarking team. These particular
histograms are used in other documents and, therefore, have a requirement for a consistent format as displayed
below. A Schedule Basis and Assumptions document will include this histogram benchmarking for each
Delivery Area of a project, not just overall.
Sanction to 1st Production
60
50
Months
40
30
20
10
0
M ad Dog Phase 2
Holstein
M ad Dog
Diana Hoover
Horn M ountain
The next application of benchmarking is in project close out. This procedure mandates milestones with the
express intent of consistently collecting key benchmark metrics from completed projects. ‘As-built’ schedule
information is the key to comparing BP actual performance to both internal and external sources.
Quickplan
BP Quickplan is a planning program that provides database information of historical data for past projects.
Quickplan allows a Planning Engineer to ‘define’ their project by type/size/ costs and is used to develop a Level
1 type plan for a project. Quickplan is also a good source of benchmarking information.
Quickplan contains historical data and metrics from past projects, mostly from offshore projects. Durations
provided by Quickplan are per project type and are cost and quantity based. Schedule metrics are generally tons
per time period. The Planning Engineer input will require project type and tonnage as a minimum plus the
forecast start of FEED and Detailed Engineering dates. Quickplan takes into account that duration is not a linear
function of tonnage and provides a more appropriate result than would be obtained by linear extrapolation.
Quickplan and the instructions are available in the ‘Tools’ section of the Planning Community of Practice.
Other Supporting Data
Trend reports for prior projects are sometimes available to use in development of the schedule basis. Contractor
proposal schedules should never be used when developing a schedule basis without factoring in trends, historical
data, and BP experience as proposal schedules are generally created to ‘sale’ a project.
Occasionally, OBO project or other as-built schedule studies will become available for inclusion in the
benchmarking.
5.8
BP Support Schedules
General Practices
BP Planning Engineers will sometimes be called on to develop support schedules in support of the BP team
efforts and better informing the MCS.
Support schedules are often meant to show tasks related to work scope managed and executed by BP directly or
to support a site where a Contractor has scope complex enough to warrant creating a ‘site specific’ Control
Schedule. These tasks may be routine BP Project Engineering functional responsibilities, BP interfaces with
Contractors, or BP self-managed work where an additional level of detail below the MCS is required to support
the team efforts in organizing this work.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 30 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Other instances may be where a site team needs to create an integrated schedule to assist in controlling a
Contractor. These schedules are generally referred to as ‘Level 3’ and are used to underpin or provide roll up
information to the Master Control Schedule.
Support schedules will also be schedules developed by BP for hook ups, commissioning work, operations or for
turnarounds where a turnaround Contractor has not been engaged to provide planning support, although this
route is strongly discouraged.
BP Commissioning requires a detailed schedule which is provided by the Commissioning Team Planning
Engineer and Operations will maintain an Operational Readiness plan, both of which will use interface
management to reflect key drivers in the MCS.
Depending direction from the project Lead Planning Engineer, BP Delivery Team Planning Engineers may be
responsible for updating their Delivery Areas in the MCS and will ultimately be accountable for alignment of
any support schedules with the MCS.
It is not permitted to import and merge a Contractor schedule file with a BP support schedule or replicate
Contractor activities in a BP-created support schedule, although it is permitted to summarize or reflect interface
milestones in the BP schedule. It is also not permitted to create BP support schedules intended to mimic or
otherwise reflect any level 3 detail contractor activities.
BP Commissioning Schedules
BP Commissioning schedules are created by the Commissioning Team Planning Engineers. Key interfaces
between commissioning and procurement, construction, engineering and operations will be reflected in the
Master Control Schedule. Detailed interfaces with engineering, procurement, construction and operations will be
reflected using interface milestones across the respective schedules, i.e. fabrication/construction MC dates held
in the fabrication/construction schedule shall be reflected as interface milestones in the detailed commissioning
plan held by BP. Key interface drivers to Operations and start up shall be reflected as interface milestones in the
Operational readiness plan.
Commissioning priorities for planning shall be provided by the start up team. Working backwards from start up
and working with construction, commissioning shall establish the required MC dates to provide to construction
for sequencing of the MC dates.
It is mandatory that commissioning schedules contain allowances by using productivity factors to account for the
troubleshooting nature of commissioning where commissioning often reveals defects or lost/broken equipment or
issues with lack of sparing. The allowances will be added above and beyond the base durations as determined by
the manhours in the commissioning procedures and used to extend the duration, rather than imply an increase in
manpower as a solution as commissioning generally plan work with a fixed team size.
The magnitude of the productivity allowances shall be determined by the commissioning planning engineer and
commissioning team in the early stages of planning and based on the complexity and number of systems, sparing
along with commissioning spares included in and for the systems, density of work, Simops, remoteness,
POB/bed count limitations and any other considerations.
It is imperative that projects realize commissioning occurs at the end of the project when float and free float is
often consumed along with some/all contingency. Not including allowances in the commissioning period
assumes 100% of the components of the facilities will function and not impact the start up date which is not
realistic and is therefore not permitted.
All commissioning activities will include the same allowances as construction for weather, permitting, holidays,
Simops, etc.
BP Operational Readiness Plan
BP Operational Readiness Plans are created by the Operations Team Planning Engineers. Key interfaces
between operations and procurement, construction, engineering and operations will be reflected in the Master
Control Schedule. Detailed interfaces with engineering, construction, commissioning and operations will be
reflected using interface milestones across the respective schedules, i.e. commissioning SH1 dates held in the
commissioning schedule shall be reflected as interface milestones in the detailed operational plan held by BP.
Reference document GPO-OP-PRO-0009 Operations Readiness Planning Detailed Requirements and Guidance
for more information on MCS and Operations planning interface management.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 31 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
5.9
Brownfield Planning
Introduction
This section describes BP’s approach to planning and executing Brownfield projects (or Greenfield projects with
a significant percentage of Brownfield content).
Brownfield projects involve varying degrees of ‘revamp’ (also referred to as retrofit, upgrade, or modification) of
existing facilities to improve facility operations, product quality, throughput, and so forth. The process of
revamping a Brownfield site requires selectively taking apart an original facility and putting it back together,
usually with more or larger pieces than were originally present. Throughout these construction activities, the
existing plant, sometimes still operating, inhibits the work and adds more complexities to the installation process.
The design activities also have to be more detailed and involve field verification of key design issues. Planning
Engineers preparing the schedule must take into account these inherent difficulties of project execution by reevaluating the work sequence, extending the activity duration where needed, planning the activity execution at
non-critical hours wherever feasible (to accommodate plant operation and maintenance), or a combination of the
three.
For all projects, a thorough evaluation and proper sequencing of the activities are important to meet the optimum
schedule. For Brownfield projects, it is especially important because the construction is being done in an existing
facility, and also there are usually many more surprises than in a Greenfield project. The Planning Engineer
needs to think through ‘what can go wrong’, and the schedule should be flexible enough to address those
unforeseen situations.
Engineering
For a Brownfield project, the detailed engineering is typically more complicated than a Greenfield project due to
the design work involved in shutdown work and the tie-ins with the existing facility. The design is lengthened
because of the necessary checks required for the existing plant and possible unanticipated findings (such as
fuel/gas and shutdown systems that, if altered, will need to be modified, tested and certified during the
shutdown). It is critical to resolve such findings in a timely fashion. The Engineering Contractor used for a
Brownfield project needs to be flexible in planning activities, and needs to optimize the schedule around the
specific requirements of the project.
Procurement
As in a Greenfield project, long lead equipment items often dictate the activity timings and project duration. If
long lead items are required for the project, the Project Team should ensure sufficient float is built into the
schedule integration to avoid impacting critical activities. With many Brownfield projects requiring shutdowns
and loss or deferral of production, great care must be shown to manage Procurement and Supply Chain
Management (PSCM) well off the critical path so as not to increase the shutdown duration due to delays in
equipment delivery or awarding contracts. Also important to note, per the Activity Planning Gate Readiness and
Waiver Process, material and equipment is required to be delivered at least 6 weeks ahead of commencement of
Brownfield work.
Scheduling Methodology
Every Brownfield project has a unique set of challenges, particularly in field construction or platform
modifications, and the risk of missing the target schedule is typically far greater than for a Greenfield project.
Therefore, the networked schedule should be as detailed as possible.
This planning of construction activities to a detailed level forces the Planning Engineer to think through all the
ramifications of the activities, that it will be executed in an existing facility and that it may interface with
operations or maintenance activities. The detailed schedule will also help in making contingency plans for
activities that may encounter unforeseen problems. These problems, such as a preceding activity taking longer
than planned, equipment not being released by Operations, or Maintenance changing their work plans, are to be
expected in a Brownfield project but having the project Brownfield planning fully integrated in the Regional
Integrated schedules will help to mitigate this risk and reduce such schedule impacts. Any of these problems will
have a negative impact on the project schedule, but having the detailed plan will help to quantify and reduce such
impacts.
The level of planning detail must be such that manpower density and POB/headcount requirements (when
offshore or remote) can be clearly understood and communicated. This translates to a requirement that all
planning is manhour based.
Several Brownfield projects are sometimes executed concurrently in the same facility. In such cases, it is
advisable to prepare a high-level schedule covering all the projects so that any possible interference between the
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 32 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
projects can be highlighted. Also, if maintenance is performed at the same time as the Brownfield project(s) are
being developed, a very common occurrence, an interface schedule covering the maintenance work and the
Brownfield work should be prepared. Identifying the interfaces early will mitigate impact of maintenance work
on the Brownfield schedule. This information is taken from the area schedule managed by Activity Planning.
Brownfield planning shall begin in the Select stage when establishing the project Master Control Schedule and
the Schedule Basis and Assumptions, including the first pass at manhour estimating based on in-house rates and
norms, when available or estimates where rates and norms are not available. Operations and Maintenance
interface planning will begin during the Select stage where known Operations Organization scope exist.
If the facility scope is more than 8 Quarters from execution, the Operations Organization planning group may not
show any required maintenance or Wells scope in their plan. In this case, the Planning Engineer will need to
identify a duration allowance for asset scope, preferably based on historical norms or otherwise estimated. Any
assumptions in this regard will be included in the Schedule Basis and Assumptions document and in the Define
Gate Schedule Risk Analysis.
Subsequent scope development (Define/Execute Engineering) will provide the details for the Project Team to
develop work packages, facilitating detailed manhour estimates and durations for individual scopes. Manhour
estimates will determine manpower requirements, often requiring accommodation and other logistical support.
Durations will be determined by any limitations on POB or density plus allowances required for Operations and
Maintenance scope.
Schedule Preparation
The method for preparing the detailed schedule is the same as for a Greenfield project. To calculate engineering
workforce loading and activity duration, the Planning Engineer should consider additional activities for review
and field verification of the original plant design, including tie-in locations, pipeline and cable routing, integrity
of structures, equipment and system isolations, possible dismantling and removal, and so forth. The BP Planning
Engineer must ensure these types of activities are reflected in the Engineering Contractor’s schedule and logic
linked to their respective deliverables.
While calculating the construction workforce loading and activity duration, the Planning Engineer should use the
workhours for each activity as calculated in the project cost estimate and validated in the work pack planning
stage. These workhours include the ‘base workhours’ for equivalent work in a Greenfield project, plus the
following allowances incremental allowances due to the Brownfield content of the project:





Accessibility and congestion
Simops productivity impacts
Non-productive time including productivity loss due to overtime or multiple shifts
Non-verification at field of the technical scope and execution plan
Time lost to permitting processes
For calculating the duration of an activity, the Planning Engineer should consider the increased workhours
inclusive of these allowances as well as the labor density (number of total workers that can be accommodated in
a given area) and when applicable, number of beds available for the workers.
Additionally, Brownfield projects often use overtime or multiple shifts to shorten the duration, and these should
be taken into account while calculating the duration for each activity. Evening and night shift productivity is
often less than day shift. This should be factored into the duration.
Since Brownfield projects occur in an existing facility, it is imperative that when the project activities are
planned, the needs of the facility operations are kept in mind. The planning is especially critical for shutdown
activities and the activities that might adversely affect the start of shutdown work or the assurances required prior
to reintroduction of hydrocarbons.
Sometimes, meeting the operations and maintenance requirements may mean several mobilizations and
demobilizations of the Brownfield work force in the same work area, resulting in loss of efficiency and
additional cost. In such cases, the Planning Engineer should work with the Operations and Organization Activity
Planning Team to see whether this loss of efficiency can be minimized by rescheduling the activities that
interfere with Project, Operations and/or Maintenance. It is anticipated that by this stage of any Brownfield
project, the project Planning Engineer and Activity Planning Team will be working through these issues jointly
in the Activity Planning Meetings
Project schedules are normally based on system turnover in the most time efficient manner to support
commissioning requirements. In the case of Brownfield projects, the best turnover sequence for the
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 33 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
project may not match the desires of Operations. In such cases, the activities have to be optimized as much
as possible, recognizing that Operations is the ultimate customer and that disruption should be minimized.
There are Contractors who specialize in Brownfield work and have scheduling tools geared for planning revamp
works. These tools can assist with the evaluation of resource loading for work activities in different project areas,
but the Planning Engineer must ensure that the loading does not adversely impact safety or other Operations
requirements. A Contractor executing Brownfield scope cannot plan in isolation, and the BP Planning Engineer
will serve as the primary planning interface between the Contractor and the facility.
Engagement of Contractors and Subcontractors, Flotel, Temporary Accommodations, Heavy Lift Vessels, etc. all
must be clearly identified in the schedule. PSCM work related to awarding these contracts must be managed well
off of the critical path. Facilitating this will require early development of a contracting strategy by Project
Management and PSCM.
Regulatory permits are often key drivers in setting the project schedule, and so special attention should be given
to obtaining such permits so that the permitting process does not upset the Brownfield shutdown work.
Regulatory processes must also be managed off the critical path.
Ultimately, the Brownfield schedule should contain sufficient float up to and including pre-work on the facility
with the critical path not starting until commencement of the actual shutdown, if a shutdown is required for the
scope. Minimizing shutdown duration will included an analysis of what work can be carried out as post work in
the operating environment. In essence, early schedule development should include identification of pre works,
shutdown work, post work and synergies with the Operations and Maintenance teams along with Activity
Planning (AP) forecast work scope for the Brownfield period which could impact the overall project duration.
Shutdown of Existing Facilities
A major consideration for revamp projects is the timing and duration of the associated shutdown(s). These are
generally dictated by Marketing and/or Operations, or by statutory requirements. It is important to remember that
during a shutdown, the facility is not generating any revenue. Hence, shortening the shutdown duration, subject
to appropriate constraints, usually improves the project economics.
Detailed planning of the shutdown activities is extremely important. As a minimum, the Planning Engineer
should focus on the following issues for planning the shutdown activities:
















Timing and duration of the shutdown
Flexibility in shutdown timing or duration
Description and estimate of any maintenance work during the shutdown
Restrictions during pre-shutdown – how much work can be done as ‘pre works’ while the facility is still
operating?
Restrictions post-shutdown – how much work can be down as ‘post works’ while the facility is operating?
Construction logistics to meet the shutdown dates (e.g. barge mobilization)
Constraints during shutdown work; limited resources, limited accommodations (POB or camp constraints)
Constraints on work places; access, scaffold requirements
Interaction among work activities (e.g. concurrent construction and testing)
Regulatory restrictions, permitting
Union restrictions which may impact shift work or overtime
Record (success or otherwise) of any previous shutdown work; benchmarking
Other projects planned during shutdown work
Engineering and equipment/materials delivery for pre shutdown and shutdown
Expected weather patterns/disruptions
A lot of effort must be put in by the team to verify an accounting of all engineering, material, equipment,
tools, specialty Contractors, etc. required to execute the scope of work, and the Planning Engineer will
clearly identify in the schedule that not only are all of the requirements in place prior to the work starting but
that an appropriate amount of schedule float is included prior to the start of a shutdown
Brownfield Projects generally proceed in three stages:
Pre-Shutdown Work
Certain activities have to be performed before the shutdown construction scope begins (e.g. the drainage of
process liquids and the purging of gas in equipment and pipelines). Also, the erections of scaffolding and
temporary or permanent access areas for equipment, materials, or construction equipment need to be completed
before the shutdown work. As far as is practical, any tie-in work that can be done before a shutdown shall be
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 34 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
planned for this early period. Critical materials (e.g. spool pieces), engineering drawings, and labor resources
shall be planned in detail so that these are as per the Activity Planning Gate Readiness and Waiver Process.
During Shutdown Work
This phase of work carries the biggest schedule risk because there are many activities that are critical, and their
duration often gets extended because of unforeseen problems. Sometimes, most of this increased duration can be
accommodated through overtime or multiple shifts. However, in many cases, overtime or extra shifts are already
planned in the schedule, and any unforeseen problem will have an adverse effect on the overall schedule.
Shutdown activity durations shall include a reasonable amount of schedule allowance time to help mitigate the
effect of unforeseen problems. At the same time, the Planning Engineer must be very careful not to build an
undue amount of allowances in the schedule and any factors must be clearly identified in the schedule basis.
Excessive allowances can lead to inflated productivity and contribute to a losing sight of the real progress.
Post-Shutdown Work
Typically, activities that are not critical in nature and do not affect the shutdown activities should be performed
during the post-shutdown period (e.g. the dismantling of redundant equipment, piping, instruments, steel, or
concrete structures that are to be removed as part of the project scope, removal of scaffold, etc.). Activities such
as painting should also be planned for this period where there are no safety risks to operations and material state
is appropriate (e.g. sandblasting may be considered similar to hot work in a live plant or hot piping cannot be
painted).
Tie-ins and System Isolation
Many tie-in activities will be on the critical path in a revamp project. Tie-ins are required not only for process
piping but also for safety systems, flares, vents, drains, control systems, electrical power, and other utilities. The
total number of tie-ins are often underestimated, their exact location not fully identified, and the routing plans not
fully defined. The type of tie-ins and their exact location should be verified in the field as far as is practical.
During the development of the basic design and detailed engineering, the number of tie-ins usually grows, and
the addition of new tie-ins often impacts the critical path. The Planning Engineer shall work closely with the
Design Engineers to correctly reflect the number of tie-ins and their impact on the critical path.
A special concern for tie-ins is the integration of safety and control systems. A common problem is the
underestimation of the complexity and time required to reconfigure control systems and update system graphics.
This may become a major issue that affects the overall duration of the project. The duration of safety and control
system tie-ins needs close scrutiny. The Planning Engineer will have discussions with the Project Team as to
what part of the safety and control systems can be configured as pre-work and tie in seamlessly during the
shutdown process. Systems programming and testing will often take place in simulation ahead of a shutdown.
As much of this work as possible needs to be managed off the critical path.
The tie-in or other revamp activities often require that a certain piece of equipment or a complete system be
isolated. It is not unusual that Operations can release the equipment or system only at a certain time. In such
cases, the Planning Engineer has to organize activities around that release time and also work closely with
Operations so that when there is a change in the equipment or system release time, the succeeding activities can
be re-planned. Also, HAZOP considerations may add new activities for equipment or system isolation. Any
system blowdown or release of hydrocarbons and purging may require a stop to any hot work planned during this
same time frame. Isolations and blowdowns/purging must be reflected in the shutdown plan.
It is important to note that much equipment and piping/E&I can be installed ahead of TAR Shutdown tie-ins.
This needs to be carefully considered by the Planning Engineer and project team for optimization as this could
take work off of the critical path.
Accessibility and Congestion
Unlike a Greenfield project, a Brownfield project may not have a well-spaced layout, and an optimum
construction sequence may not be feasible because of the need to work within an existing unit. This complexity
not only increases the workhours for specific activities but can also extend their duration, including the duration
of critical activities. The Planning Engineer is to determine whether the activities that are critical or near critical
can take longer because of revamp complexity and make the proper adjustment in sequencing, as far as possible,
to reduce the schedule risks.
The access to equipment, piping, or instruments may be constrained by the existing facilities. The project may
require additional scaffolding, special rigging arrangements, or provision for temporary access to get to these
equipment or bulk items. The accessibility should be field checked, and the Planning Engineer should consider
not only the accessibility of equipment and bulk materials but also of the construction equipment. If new
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 35 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
activities are needed for creating access, these shall be added to the schedule. Some of these activities may also
impact the critical path.
It is best practice for the Brownfield team to walk down the facility and flag each tie-in during the workpack
development and detailed planning processes. The Planning Engineer should inspect each tie-in location to
facilitate incorporating access issues and other complexities into the plan. In no way should all tie-ins be
considered ‘equal’.
Labor Density and Low Productivity
Labor density can be a major concern during a revamp project. This is because once a fixed work area has been
saturated with personnel further increases in the workforce will result in an unacceptable decline in productivity.
For calculating the maximum personnel levels and determining the duration of activities, the labor density in the
revamp areas shall be considered. The area calculation includes straddled pipe racks and access-ways. When plot
plans are available, 75 to 100 sq. ft. of available area per person is a good rule of thumb. When only the data for
the gross ground area is available, 100 to 125 sq. ft. per person should be used to calculate the staffing level. The
available work area is calculated as follows:
Available work area = (gross ground area + major platform area) – 15% due to lost space
This only applies to areas where work is to take place.
The lost space accounts for areas around equipment pieces or construction equipment. The acceptable staffing
levels include workers both for the project and maintenance. If there are maintenance workers around, the project
construction staffing level can be reduced and the project duration extended. These are issues that must be
addressed within the Activity Planning integrated scheduling process.
Compared to Greenfield projects, more field workhours are spent in daily activity planning in a Brownfield
project. There are also unproductive times due to the remoteness of the support facilities from the main work
areas, stoppages while working within an operating unit, and so forth. These additional workhours not only
impact the staffing level but also may extend the duration of the critical activities. The Planning Engineer will
evaluate the critical activities for possible extensions because of unproductive time and reflect any variances in
the schedule forecast.
Barge, Flotel and TLQ
Even though a platform or an FPSO/FSO facility may have available bed space for much of the work duration,
there may be a sudden peak of bed space demand due to the Brownfield project work. Operations and
Maintenance may choose to bring in specialty Contractors during these periods placing additional pressure on
POB. The bed space requirement should be reviewed, and, if necessary, the use of a flotel should be included in
the project plans. Bed space availability may affect the available crew capacity and its concurrent impact on the
duration of the offshore campaign. Onshore Brownfield projects must have the same consideration as to the
requirement for Temporary Living Quarters (TLQs).
Other key onshore and offshore constraints to be included in the planning include transportation and logistics,
such as work and delivery boats, helicopters, trucking, weather windows, etc.
Permitting
Issuing and controlling work permits (including hot work permits) are key activities for a Brownfield project.
The proper scheduling of permit approval is extremely important for the timely start of the construction
activities, particularly those activities that cause a production shutdown and a loss of revenue. Additionally,
Operations personnel are often overwhelmed with the large number of permits that they are expected to manage.
It is not unusual to spend 2 to 3 hours at the beginning of the work day in processing permits, hence it is
critically important to account for all the permits that are required and to plan ahead for each of them. Permitting
is a productivity issue that should be factored into the manhour planning.
Detailed Schedule Development
As the project scope is better defined, work packs will be developed detailing out the scope, materials and
resources required to complete the work. Work packs are generally reflected in the schedule at Level 3. Some
regions prefer to use a work pack/job card system where work pack is Level 3 and job card is Level 4. The Level
4 job card activities for the critical path are then broken down to Level 5. In this instance, Level 5 schedules
reflecting the critical path shall be ‘quantifiable activity per shift’ and will be included in the P6 schedule.
Several regions have developed work pack and job card processes that are well developed, effective and have
become engrained in the regional Brownfield processes. Processes that are accepted by the team and working
shall be shared with the broader Planning CoP via the Shared Learning System for evaluation and subsequent
addition to the CoP Tools or future revisions of this procedure.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 36 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Whether the project decides to use work pack planning or work pack/job card planning, sufficient detail must
exist in the schedule to facilitate determining daily manpower requirements, detailed Simops analysis, hot work
locations, confined spaces, isolation requirements and any other safe out requirements along with the logistical
requirements to support the project.
Minimizing shutdown durations require very tight schedule control, therefore shutdown scheduling is to have
activity relationships of Finish-to-Start logic with no lag. Any other type of relationships and lag shall be kept at
a minimum.
During schedule development, various reviews of the schedule will take place including Simops, resource
requirements, equipment required, personnel density before the schedule is agreed and the baseline is set.
All work packs will be prioritized as part of the scheduling process. All activities will be resource loaded with
manhours/trade, key equipment and quantities of work (e.g. number of terminations, meters/feet of cable,
number and size of spools, etc.). The progressing of activity will be done by the Planning Engineer and the
construction supervisor on physical quantities in-place stated as a percent complete per the work pack and/or job
card. Progress will not be duration or cost based. For single item activities, binary progress will be used either
0% or 100%.
Any addition, deletion, variance or reduction in scope will be tightly controlled via a shutdown additional/change
work request process developed by the Project Team.
Once the work begins, the schedule will be updated daily to allow for daily and weekly planning reports to be
produced. Periodic schedule updating (more than daily) is not permitted as too much schedule variances are
required to be addressed as soon as they occur.
Shutdowns will report on a daily basis. Shutdown daily reports will include POB/manpower head count, HSSE
stats, activities completed, delays, special needs, issues and concerns.
A shutdown S-curve and resource histogram are to be available and updated weekly showing planned, actual,
forecasts and variance. A full shutdown lookahead plan will be updated and issued weekly. The project will
determine which construction metrics are to be tracked and reported. Construction metrics will be produced
weekly. The 1-week lookahead plan will be updated and available on a daily basis.
Once systems completion stage has commenced a skyline of MC1 and SH1 dates and progress will be updated
and issued weekly.
Over the course of the shutdown, direct manhours expended per work pack will be recorded against each work
pack (or job card when used) for performance analysis against plan and historical data/benchmarking purposes.
Detailed “as-built” brownfield schedules are to be included in the project close out report.
5.10
Interface with Activity Planning
The GPO Project interface with Area Planning begins during the Select Stage of a project containing Brownfield
scope in the various concepts being considered during the Concept Selection Process. Operations organization
inputs are required as part of the selection process. Additional inputs are required in development of the Master
Control Schedule during the Concept Definition Stage occurring in late Select. Once a concept is selected and
being defined, it is anticipated that GPO Project leadership will begin participating in the monthly AOM (Area
Operations Manager) Table meetings to assist in ensuring full integration of project and functional activities with
the Operations Organization. Operations are expected to provide inputs in determination of any Brownfield
scope overall durations which may influence the overall project Master Control Schedule and subsequent
schedule contingency.
It is mandatory that GPO project planning strictly adhere to the Activity Planning interface requirements as laid
out in this section of the procedure.
Activity Planning Process
Activity Planning is the process by which work is planned, scheduled and executed at site within a Region as
directed by the Region business plans and in accordance with Region priorities. The Functions prioritize, plan
and manage delivery of agreed activity sets and these activities must all be integrated at an area level for the
execution of the complete activity set. Activity Planning will apply to activities executed on existing brownfield
sites by all Functions within Exploration, Developments and Production Divisions.
The Activity Planning processes for Functional and Area Scheduling, which include the 8Q, 12 Week, 6 Week
and 2 Week meetings, including applicable gate criteria are described in detail in EP SDP 1.3-0002 and the EP
SG 1.3-0002. GPO Brownfield Projects are required to conform to this process. All GPO activities will appear
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 37 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
on the Regional Activity Planning Primavera Area Integrated Schedule for a brownfield site. The AP Area
Integrated Schedule is reviewed at the Area Scheduling meetings, and once approved by the Gatekeeper is the
schedule followed by all functions and the site teams in execution of activities. The process flow from GPO to
Activity Planning is as follows:
5.10.1.1 Functional Schedules
The GPO Project Planning Engineer will provide to the AP Functional Lead/Scheduler a Level 2 functional
schedule, at a minimum by 8Q, to be added into the AP Regional Primavera database using the structure and
coding as provide by Activity Planning. This schedule will be identified as the Projects Interface Schedule and
will include the necessary data required by AP. The Projects interface schedule:
 Is based on a high quality Work Pack and shows the duration and sequence of and dependencies of
activities
 Indicates site where the activity is to take place
 Shows service lines and key functional activities (Including all activities that involve the facilities including
logistics; movement of people, equipment and materials into or out of the facility, type of work including all
safety aspects: hot work, working at heights, working overhead, lifting, working overboard, diving
operations, etc. and all other activities are routinely required to be identified to plan and control the work)
 Activities contain POB resource requirements for offshore site and are broken down to the craft level where
non-GPO site personnel are required.
 Is reviewed and approved by the Functional team
 Can be executed within applicable Area constraints
The Project Planning Engineers provide fully resourced activities specifying any support from Operations
resources such as support for isolations, permits, work pack reviews, tool/equipment requirements, etc. As the
project moves through the 8Q, 12Wk, 6Wk and 2Wk time horizons the GPO Project Planning Engineer will
provide updates to the AP Functional Lead/AP Functional Scheduler (APFL/APFS) for the Projects Interface
Schedule. The Project Planning Engineer will work directly with APFL and Area Planning Team Leaders
(APTLs) in considering the entire work scope required to be completed during the Brownfield work periods,
including the work to be executed by Operations, Maintenance, other Functional activity and Category B projects
as this drives the overall durations.
5.10.1.2 Functional Scheduling Meetings
Functional Scheduling meetings are held on a regular basis to:
 Confirm that functional activity plans remain deliverable within functional constraints and approved budgets
 Ensure that functional resources are optimally deployed across the Region to deliver priorities
 Check AP Gate readiness and do-ability for all timeframes, ensuring that scheduled activities are ready for
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 38 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure


safe and efficient execution
Manage changes to the Functional Schedule
Ensure that risks to delivery are managed through mitigation and/or contingency
The APFL will set up GPO Functional Scheduling Meetings for 8Q, 12Wk and 6Wk to ensure the schedule is
agreed to and approved by the Function and test the project against the AP Gate Readiness criteria.
The AP Gate criteria are to be included in Project Brownfield schedules as milestones and underpinned by
detailed activities required to achieve these milestones, recognizing some of the detail may be included in other
service provider schedules (EPMS contractor for example) and managed as interface milestones.
5.10.1.3 AP Gate Readiness
Review of the AP Schedule Gate Criteria will occur at the GPO Functional Scheduling Meetings for 8Q, 12
Week and 6 Week, and are then reviewed at the Area Scheduling meetings for all the same time horizons.
Regional AP Schedule Gate Criteria has been defined for each time horizon (8Q, 12 Week, 6 Week and 2 Week).
Each Region has a set of AP Schedule Gate Criteria. The APFL/APFS will work with the Project Planning
Engineer to review the gates to confirm all activities have met the criteria, and determine if a Schedule Waiver is
required. If a Scheduler Waiver is required it must first be approved by the GPO Functional Team Lead, and
then by the AP Gatekeeper prior to being allowed to proceed. The Schedule Waiver process requires a complete
evaluation of the key drivers to the reasons for failing the gate criteria, along with details of change regarding
risks, POB, logistics, HSSE and any other considerations that are part of normal gate process and evaluation to
allow work to move forward on a facility. Schedule Waivers are considered at the 12, 6 and 2 week timeframes.
Any work that does not meet the AP Gate Readiness criteria, and does not have an approved Schedule Waiver
cannot proceed and will need to be re-scheduled.
5.10.1.4 Area Scheduling
Area Scheduling is the integration of independent functional activities and the OMS Area Operating Plan into a
single Integrated Area Schedule that can be executed within existing Area constraints. Activity Planning will
produce an Area Integrated Schedule using the Functional Schedules provided by Projects and other functions
with work at the facility. The Integrated Area Schedule is produced by the Activity Planning Team at the 8Q, 12week, 6-week, 2-week time horizons. All site work, including Projects work, must be accurately represented on
the single Integrated Area Schedule. Delivery of integrated Area Schedules is only achieved if high quality
functional plans, capable of being safely and efficiently executed, are delivered. For this reason, Functional
Scheduling meetings are held prior to Area scheduling meetings with information then flowing into the Area
scheduling meetings. The AOM (or the AOM Delegate) owns and approves the Integrated Area Schedule views.
Area Schedules:
 Based on a high quality functional Work Packs and show the duration and sequence of activities to be
executed and any dependencies
 Highlights which activities meet all the Gate Criteria and are “Green to Go”
 Has been fully reviewed and “approved” by the Area team to confirm it is able to be executed safely and
efficiently within area constraints
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 39 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
5.10.1.5 Area Scheduling Meetings
Area Scheduling meetings are held at 8Q, 12 Week, 6 Week and 2 Week and the Functional SPA for the project
will be in attendance. The purpose of the meeting is to:
 Confirm that Area Schedules are deliverable within area constraints
 Ensure that area resources are optimally deployed
 Manage changes to the Area Schedule
 Review gate readiness and do-ability ensuring that scheduled activities are ready for safe and efficient
execution
 Ensure that risks to delivery are managed through mitigation and/or contingency
Prior to the Area Scheduling meetings the APTL/LAS (Lead Area Scheduler) will work with APFL for GPO and
the Project Planning Engineers to confirm: gate compliance check, schedule conflict resolution, scheduling
emergent work and slippage identification and mitigation options. All changes to the projects schedule are
approved by Projects prior to gate keeper approval of the schedule at the Area Schedule Meetings. Any
proposed changes that occur at the Area Scheduling meeting must be agreed and approved by Projects, and the
Interface Schedule is updated, which will then update the Area Schedule.
5.10.1.6 AOM Table
The AOM Table governs Area Integration by ensuring that the Area Schedule is in line with the wider business
strategy as well as reviewing all material changes to the Area Schedule that are described in the forms of Plan
Change Proposals (PCPs), and assessing their impact on the Business Plan Elements (BPEs). The processes and
requirements of the AOM Table are set out in Upstream Practice: Area Integration Requirements for AOMs and
Regional VP Reports EP SDP 1.3-0003. BPEs and PCPs are defined under the provisions of Upstream Business
Planning Guide EP SG 1.3-0001. GPO is represented at the Regional AOM Table by Project General Manager or
their delegate.
5.10.1.7 Planning Systems
Project Planning and AP will work together to determine the appropriate structure and content of the Interface
Schedule to facilitate ease of integration and updating. Activities must be coded using the code structure as
provided by Activity Planning. The Interface Schedule and all subsequent updates will be transferred to AP in
the digital native file format as provided for in the Primavera software (file export extension .xer to the AP
Regional Primavera data base.)
In instances where GPO and AP files reside in the same database the files shall not be logic linked. Bridging
schedule files will be facilitated with the use of interface milestones and summary activities which are updated
manually. The reason for this is to add assurance that the Planning Engineers are conducting the required
schedule analysis as schedule changes occur. This also allows each Planning Engineer to remain in control of
their own schedule. Working closely together, the projects and APTL will be responsible to ensure the schedule
data remains in synchronization to ensure two sets of dates are not shown for the same activity across two files.
Where GPO project files reside outside the AP database, the file transfer of Brownfield scope will still take place
digitally via the file export/import function as provided for in the Primavera software.
For Brownfield work requiring a shutdown period of longer than 6 months or as agreed between Production and
GPO and where the majority of the work is project scope or where the project and AP have decided it is prudent,
the project and operations may take the decision to place an Activity Planning Engineer on the Project Team.
The Activity Planning Engineer will work with the Project Team to identify GOO scope for inclusion in an
Integrated Project schedule whereas the GOO scope is executed as a part of the project.
It is recognized that additional procedure development and discussions will be required to continue to drive
improvements into the AP/MP interface processes as Category B Projects move into GPO.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 40 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
5.11
Contractor Schedule Development
Most of BP contracts include a BP Project Coordination Procedure, which addresses the planning, scheduling,
progress measurement and reporting requirements of the Contractor. It is the responsibility of the Planning
Engineer to be well versed in these documents and oversee the Contractors implementation of same.
Although it is perfectly acceptable for BP Planning Engineers to ‘coach’ Contractor Planning Engineers to
deliver products that meets BP requirements, it is forbidden for BP Planning Engineers to plan a Contractors’
scope of work on behalf of the Contractor or to impose progress measurement and reporting systems. The party
executing the work is to remain fully responsible for the planning, progress measurement and reporting of their
scope. That said there will be times when BP will have to engage or intervene in correcting contractor schedules
and reporting methods.
Project Services and PSCM shall work diligently to continuously improve the Project Coordination Procedures
planning requirements in line with this procedure when the opportunities arise.
The following requirements are intended for all phases of a project including engineering, procurement,
construction/fabrication, installation, hook up and commissioning for all project types. There will be variances
for certain types of top-tier Contractors that have long established processes which have withstood the test of
time with BP. Examples of these would be Heerema and Allseas, Offshore Heavy Lift and Pipelay Contractors.
This section is not intended to inform any Contractor on how to construct a schedule but rather to provide BP
Planning Engineers with key insights as to what is expected from a Contractor developing a schedule and key
issues that warrant attention of the Planning Engineer.
Reference Appendix F for further definition and rules regarding Contractor Schedule Development.
Software
BP top-tier Contractors are expected to use as a minimum Primavera P6 Version 7 as their planning and
scheduling tool. Any Primavera P6 Version 8 outputs are required to be transmitted to BP as Version 7. The use
of any other scheduling software or other version of Primavera is subject to approval of the company.
It is a requirement of BP that a Contractors’ current and forecast scope of work for a project shall be included in
one integrated project schedule file utilizing the agreed WBS. As an example, an EPMS Contractor responsible
for engineering and procurement will be required to submit one integrated engineering and procurement schedule
file, not two schedules; one each for engineering and procurement. A Contractor performing multiple phases of a
project shall submit an integrated schedule for all of their current and foreseen scope. Integration includes FEED
when the same Contractor is performing FEED and subsequent work.
Contractors performing FEED, detailed engineering and procurement shall plan FEED scope to Level 3 to permit
resource loading and plan subsequent stages at Level 2, until such time as resource loading is required before
entering the next stage when the requirement arises to create a level 3 resource loaded schedule for Execute
activities. Resource loaded level 3 schedules shall be prepared before the work starts (prior to Define for FEED
schedules or prior to the start of Execute for Execute activities).
Work Breakdown Structure
Contractors shall be required to develop its project baseline schedule and project schedule in a hierarchical
manner consistent with the BP agreed WBS, Work Packages and disciplines, while maintaining the ability to roll
up these individual elements at the detail-level to a management-level summary. The Contractor WBS shall be
easily related to the respective WBS in the Master Control Schedule to facilitate ease of updating.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 41 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Schedule Development and Control Plan
When called out in the contract, the Contractor will develop and submit a Schedule Development and Control
Plan (SDCP) for the work. The SDCP shall cover all the essentials of schedule development, project control
schedule analysis, schedule forecasting, schedule and progress reporting against a baseline, corrective actions,
and shall cover the entire current and forecast scope of work.
90 Day Lookahead
Most contracts require the Contractor to prepare a Preliminary 90 Day Lookahead Schedule to manage early start
up activities, pending approval of a fully developed and networked schedule. The Preliminary 90 Day Lookahead
Schedule will contain sufficient detail to manage early start up activities, including development of all plans and
procedures, WBS, CTRs when required and mobilization and staffing plans. Delivery of the 90 day lookahead
will be as per the timing set out in the PCPs or prior to the start of the work, whichever occurs first.
Schedule Development
Contractors are to prepare and submit a baseline schedule for review and approval as per contract requirements.
Baselines will not be changed without company approval.
A copy of the baseline schedule will be used to develop the working schedule. The baseline schedule will remain
on file to be compared to the working schedule over the course of the project. Schedule actuals will be reported
from the working schedule against the baseline schedule. Baseline bars are to be included on monthly schedule
updates to indicate how the Contractor is performing against the plan.
Fabrication and Construction Contractors over the course of the project will fully develop a Mechanical
Completion Plan clearly indicating mechanical completion dates of each identified system. The planning basis
for Mechanical Completion will be based on the priorities as identified in the Commissioning schedule as
provided by BP to the Contractor.
When submitting the baseline, the Contractor is to submit a ‘Schedule Basis, Assumptions, Risk and
Opportunities’ document which clearly:







Describes the main logic underpinning the schedule (including but not limited to any early contracting or
subcontracting requirements)
List all assumptions included in the development of the schedule being sure to list major interface dates and
assumptions within the Contractors schedule that drive the Contractors critical path
Explains how production/productivity considerations/factors have been addressed
Identifies data sources for planned schedule durations (benchmarking against similar projects)
Explain plans for resource loading of schedule activities and provides resource data in a tabular format as
per agreed WBS Work Package/Discipline/Area
Identifies and explains risks, risk allowance considerations, and shows schedule contingency and how it is to
be managed
List schedule opportunities.
Throughout the course of the project the Contractor will submit its baseline and working schedule both in
Primavera native .xer electronic files and as .pdf files as per the reporting requirements stated in the contract. The
.xer schedule file will include all information necessary to duplicate Contractors’ Level 3 schedules, progress
measurement curves and resource requirements. This is required for the BP Planning Engineer to ascertain the
integrity and level of completeness of the Contractors’ schedule. Contractors are to be directed to use the P6
WBS feature for organization of the schedule.
Contractors’ baseline and working schedules will be reviewed for approval and BP may require modifications.
Contractor shall promptly implement any modifications to the Project Execution Schedule or formats requested
by BP.
The BP Planning Engineer and the Project Team are responsible for validating that Contractor schedules are
achievable based on historical data, market conditions, past Contractor performance and any other conditions
that could influence activity durations.
Once approved, the working project schedule will be the basis for ongoing detailed planning and detailed replanning of the work, if required.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 42 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Derived Schedules
Most contracts required Contractors to prepare Level 1, 2, and 3 schedules along with lookahead schedules. This
section describes the requirements of these documents which are all to be derived from the Contractor’s baseline
and current working schedule.
Contractors will only use the baseline and a single identified version of the current live project schedule as
source schedules (i.e. the Contractor will not use multiple Primavera files to generate the derived schedules listed
below). All schedules and schedule information provided by the Contractor will be from the same source file
unless otherwise requested (what-if type schedules, etc.). All schedules are organized by WBS unless otherwise
requested by BP.
The Level 1 summary schedule is in the form of a one-page bar chart with summary schedule bars by Work
Package and/or Discipline and progress bars showing early and late positions taken from the live project
schedule. The summary schedule bars will be underpinned by the baseline schedule summary bars. The Level 1
schedule is a management-level report and can be prepared in Microsoft Excel or similar with data taken from
the Contractors baseline and current schedule and will include a summary progress curve showing performance
against the baseline. Contractors will preferably present the Level 1 summary schedule and progress curve on a
single sheet.
The Level 2 schedule is an intermediate roll up of the detailed Level 3 live project schedule (using bottom up
development) which may be used as a reporting tool. Schedule analysis will take place at level 3 or below.
The Level 3 schedule contains the greatest level of detail and includes a detailed time-scaled bar chart schedule
directly derived from a detailed logic network (Critical Path Network), which establishes the order and estimated
times by which activities are planned to be completed. A Level 3 schedule activity count is typically in the
thousands, depending on project size.
The Level 3 schedule clearly identifies the critical and sub-critical paths.
The logic network will identify all constraints, relationships and interrelationships and show total float and free
float of non-critical path activities. Contractors will use the Primavera notebook feature to document the reason
for the use of constraints.
The detailed working Level 3 live project schedule is integrated across the full current scope and projected scope
of the Contractor and identifies and provides a comprehensive set of activities that fully reflect the whole scope
of the contract including those activities associated with project management, material sourcing, plant and
equipment suppliers, Subcontractors, Independent Certifying Agencies, and both onsite and offsite fabrication
and transportation, all major Subcontractors, third party inspection and authority-related activities where slippage
would impact critical milestones such as the start of construction, sequenced handover, sailaway and/or offshore
installation windows. Fabrication, construction and offshore Level 3 schedules will also show all equipment
required dates and major lift dates and setting of equipment.
It is not permitted for a contractor to show single activity bars representing project management functions from
the start of project to the end. This behavior often masks the critical path.
The current and projected scope may include scope for which a call off has not yet been raised. This will not
relieve the Contractor of a requirement to develop level 2 schedules for projected scope. Contractors are required
to provide an integrated schedule which includes level 3 schedule for current scope and level 2 for future scope
regardless of whether the call off has been raised for the future scope or not.
The Level 3 schedule shall define milestones as in terms of approved individual activities whose collective
completion determines achievement of the milestones. Where specific deliverables or outcomes of individual
activities contribute to the achievement of a milestone, such activities will not span milestones but will be split
out as separate activities whose separate completion is clearly distinguishable and measurable. Milestones shall
be defined for all milestone payments, for all sets of activities where key work of other Contractors or
Subcontractors is dependent on completion of those activities and/or where timely completion of the set of
activities is required to ensure maintenance of the overall schedule such as Interface Milestones. Milestones will
be shown at the top of the first page of the schedule layouts and include milestones as provided by BP to meet
the MP Mandatory Milestone requirements where these milestones are part of a contractors scope (cut steel for
example).
Levels 4 and 5 detailed network, tables and spreadsheets provide further breakdown and detailing of activities in
the Level 3 network schedule. These lower levels will be developed and used by Contractor for monitoring and
controlling the work as required by Contractor to better determine the durations of activities at Level 3.
Examples of these lists include deliverables register, punchlist, procurement status, expediting reports, etc. BP
Planning Engineers are required to regularly review these lists as part of the schedule analysis and oversight.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 43 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Contractor Milestone Table
Company approved milestones are to be listed in a Milestone Table, which includes description of milestone,
planned start and completion dates from the baseline project schedule, actual start and completion dates achieved
and forecast date from the live project schedule. Variance from the baseline schedule is to be indicated for each
milestone. The Milestone Table shall become an integral part of the weekly and monthly reporting.
Maintenance of the Contractor Baseline
Contractors shall not be allowed to increase or decrease manhour budgets over the course of the project for
minor and routine changes.
In order to maintain clarity, progress shall be measured against approved changes separate from the baseline
progress until such time as it is agreed to re-baseline the schedule. At this time all approved changes shall be
added to the baseline manhour estimate and the progress curve would be modified to reflect both the re-baselined
schedule and manhours.
Reference section 7 for more information on re-baselining projects.
5.12
Schedule Updates
It is required that schedules are updated on a real time basis as schedule information becomes available, events
occur or other variances are encountered, although it is appreciated that there will be some dependency on
Contractor update and reporting cycles. BP Planning Engineer direct involvement with Contractor day-to-day
events can mitigate any delay that occurs when waiting on Contractor reporting cycles.
Although setting aside a time for ‘monthly updates’ is appropriate, there is no valid reason for not updating a
Primavera schedule as events occur. Events that impact the schedules should be reflected in the schedules when
known and simultaneously reported out to the team. Managers will be informed of schedule variances as they
occur rather than waiting on reporting cycles. Schedule and Contractor reporting cycles are not acceptable
reasons to delay conveying schedule concerns to BP management.
At the same time, a Planning Engineer should be careful to make sure that they are not sounding false warnings
by validating any information they may have on schedule variance, particularly as to how it may impact the
schedule before sounding any alarms. BP Planning Engineers are required to present recovery options or ideas
whenever reporting schedule variances which produce a negative impact to the schedule.
Contractor update and reporting cycles are generally prescribed in the Contract coordination procedures or other
contract exhibits. Contractor schedule updates will be weekly or bi-weekly as the contract specifies, and the
MCS will be updated immediately on receipt of the Contractor schedules.
The MCS will be distributed to the BP team on a monthly basis, predicted to be around the 10 th of each month or
within 10 days of the monthly cut off.
To reiterate, BP Planning Engineers are expected to monitor project activity daily and convey information in real
time, even if this is in between Contractor updating cycles.
5.13
Resource Loading Schedules
Resource planning allocates people (often by discipline or trade), materials, and other items to activities and
allows required resources to be shown over the planned timeframe. Contactors normally carry out detailed
resource planning at Level 3 and 4. Resource planning includes indirects as this is an integral part of project
support, but direct manpower is the manpower that will drive the schedule duration. Direct manhours are those
directly responsible for producing deliverables related to earning progress. Progress is not earned for indirect
manhours.
When contractors include all resources in a schedule, care must be shown that indirects are only loaded as LOE,
Level of Effort activities and are not allowed to drive the critical path.
BP requires a minimum Level 3 resource loaded schedule to ensure the Contractor has sufficient resources to
achieve the schedule objectives.
Resource loading and leveling of schedules are used to generate the target and progress curves. Once the
resource curves are developed activities will invariably need to be rescheduled to develop a smooth and
achievable resource distribution. This process is known as resource leveling or smoothing. BP Planning
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 44 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Engineers are to assure that Contractor resources are leveled so as not to exceed Contractor capability or provide
less than optimal resources.
For all engineering or construction contracts, a resource loaded Level 3 or 4 detailed schedule is essential to
understanding resource issues. Understanding the required resources through time analysis and developing a
strategy to meet those needs is a better approach than assuming resource availability is the dominate driver in
determining the length and timing of activities. However, an exception might be where a strict limit on labor or
materials exists, e.g. in a very remote location or on a very small site with limited workfaces in which case
resource loading and leveling of scheduling is essential to clearly reflect the limits.
Likely scenarios for schedules driven by limited amount of resource loading are offshore hook ups or facility
turnarounds, constrained by bed space, logistics and/or personnel density.
For these reasons, offshore hook ups and onshore/offshore Brownfield work schedule are primarily driven by
resource limitations and require a much more detailed level of planning than Greenfield projects, although both
require resource loading.
Contractors shall provide resource loaded schedules and planning by discipline. Discipline manpower planning
should be based on base estimate direct manhours including projected productivity planned to be earned per
period divided by the scheduled hours per period. The direct manhours per period should be easily correlated to
the progress planned for the week. The planned hours to earn for a reporting period divided by the schedule
workhours per reporting period should yield the FTE, full time equivalent manpower planned for the period or be
within a reasonable range.
See Appendix G for examples of resource loading outputs.
6
Project Weighting, Progress and Forecast
6.1
Introduction
Project progress measurement is the key to understanding projects performance against the baseline progress
plan. Variances against the baseline progress plan shall serve to alert management of where a project is tracking
ahead or behind schedule and identify problem areas where attention may be required to maintain or recover
progress in support of meeting schedule obligations.
This procedure identifies the minimum requirements to report performance against plan for the
Contractor/Delivery Area performance-level schedules and overall project progress. Progress measurement and
reporting will be supported by the Contractor progress reporting requirements as identified in the Project
Coordination Procedures or as provided in other Contractor requirements. Progress planning and measurement
for BP executed work, such as certain Brownfield scope, and integration of installation, hook up and
onshore/offshore commissioning, will be developed and maintained by BP Project Services with the assistance of
the Contractors executing the work when available. All progress will be summarized by the WBS structure
aggregated to overall progress by CVP stage for Define and for Execute.
Progress measurement is not measured or reported against contingent Performance Targets (PT) or Not to
Exceed (NTE) dates. The general construct of the MCS and progress basis is relative to PT and NTE as depicted
below. Note that the MCS scope and progress will often run past first production and overlap with contingent
periods.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 45 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Define
FM
Planned
1st Product ion
Execut e FM
Master Control Schedule
Perform ance
Target "PT"
FM Prom ise
Contingency to PT
Not t o Exceed
"NTE"
Contingency to NTE
Note there is no "natural"
progress curve that runs
to the PT or NTE
Work will often continue past first production
Progress to First Production
Progress to Completion
Contractor and BP Control Schedules
6.2
Progress Limits
Define
Facilities progress for Define includes FEED engineering only and begins with initiation of the first FEED
deliverable and culminates on the completion of the last FEED deliverable. It is not unusual for the first FEED
deliverables to begin development during Concept Definition in the latter part of the Select stage. Unless the
FEED scope is established via agreed CTRs and the progress measurement database loaded with deliverables,
any pre-Define deliverables issued during Select will not have a basis for measurement and therefore would not
be progressed as a percent complete until the Define progress measurement systems are established on the
transition of Select to Define.
Execute
The GPO planning standard progress measurement process aggregates Contractor and BP progress curves by
applying simple weightings to produce overall project progress curves. Historically GPO has tracked progress to
various completion milestones such as:





Start Up of a facility
First production
First Oil
First Gas
Project Completion (for those projects not including added production or re-starts)
For the purpose of this document, this milestone will be noted as first production. Although this document
applies primarily to Facilities progress for Execute, GWO should follow the same principles.
First production almost always involves a transition from Execute to Operate as the Operations takes control of
the facility and any remaining work in the facility falls under the control of Operations. However, this is often
not completion of the entire project scope of work.
The capturing of progress relating only to that part of the total project scope that contributes to first production
remains a key element of the BP progress reporting process. It must be appreciated that there are often other
parts of the project scope that do not directly relate to first production and may well not be completed until after
first production is achieved.
The purpose of this document is to clarify that project progress will be measured and reported as follows



100% complete to first production measured against the scope required for first production
100% complete for all work not required for first production as a discrete element
100% complete for total project
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 46 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Facilities and GWO progress shall be reported individually and aggregated to the levels indicated above.
Remaining Scope Progress Measurement – Not required for first production
There are many variations of the scope not required for first production and remaining after a project reaches
first production. Subsea equipment fabrication for non-first production scope will often take place well ahead of
first production and falls into this category. Other examples include ongoing drilling, completion and hook up
scope, ongoing subsea development after a platform has come on line or construction and commissioning
completion and start up of subsequent trains, many times in parallel to first production scope. To be able to
monitor and control progress effectively, scope not required for first production must be progressed as a discrete
element.
Once first production begins a facility becomes an operating facility and falls under the control of Operations. If
the production facility is complete, it is not unusual for continuing dry or wet tree well hook up work to be
executed under the control of operations. In this case, the facility may be considered complete with no further
progress to measure and report.
Another common example is where post first production facilities progress to-go is a small percentage of total
progress and is spread over a long period of time. There is no value added to measuring progress in
infinitesimally small numbers. As an example, measuring 10% of total progress spread over 15 months is too
finite to provide any meaningful analysis of performance against plan. Measuring 100% of to-go progress is far
more effective in this case.
Similar to dry trees, subsea installation and hook up scope can carry on post first production. If the production
facility is complete it is not unusual for the remaining subsea facility scope to be handed over to the subsea
function for completion and the main project team to disband.
Summary
The Execute scope of work required to reach first production will be progressed and reported to 100% complete.
This is required to manage and control projects to the FM promise. Non first production scope will be measured
to 100% complete as a discrete element. Projects shall roll up the first production and remaining scope to
determine an overall project percent complete. Projects should consider whether there will be handover of the
remaining scope to GPO Category B, Regional Category C or to a field or subsea hook up program as often
happens on continuing developments projects. Consideration of future handover of scope should be addressed
very early in the project for planning and budgetary purposes. Handing over remaining scope to another group
will not relieve this group from reporting progress against this discrete remaining scope of work.
6.3
Progress Basis Overview
The key to reliable progress measurement is to measure physically completed work scope, not expended
manhours or time elapsed. Examples of physical measurement include engineering document deliverables as per
rules of credit; procurement earned value, tons of steel installed, or number of systems commissioned.
Responsibilities like project management, project engineering, project controls, procurement support, document
control, scaffolding, non-working foreman and so forth, are non-progressable and are not included in progress
measurement because they produce no deliverables. These are generally referred to as indirect manhours and are
not progressable. Manhours expended in the production of deliverables/quantities are direct manhours and
included in the measure of progress and productivity.
When the detail deliverables schedules are resource weighted (loaded) and progress curves are generated,
progress shall be aggregated from the lowest levels up to total project progress as per the WBS structure
established for the project. Progress will roll up from detailed schedule activities to Level 3 of the WBS
(engineering, procurement, fabrication, etc.), which will then roll up to Delivery Area. Delivery Areas will be
aggregated to total project progress.
Progress measurement will be based on physical quantities delivered resulting from direct manhours, expressed
as an actual period and cumulative percentage of completion and reported against the planned percent complete
for the same period. Progress variance shall be included on all reporting. Actual manhours expended shall not be
used to represent progress.
Progress shall be planned, measured and reported in accordance with the project Schedule WBS and will be
easily related to the Level 1 summary schedule, Master Control Schedule and supporting Level 3 and 4
schedules.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 47 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
6.4
When to Measure Progress
Define
Progress measurement starts at the Select to Define Stage Gate or on the commencement of production of FEED
deliverables by an Engineering Contractor, whichever comes first.
Define stage progress measurement will be progressed from 0 percent to 100 percent for the FEED scope and
aggregated when multiple Contractors are executing FEED on a project. Progress weighting for the purpose of
aggregating multiple FEED Contractors will be relative to the estimated contract value for each FEED scope.
Once weightings are set, they will be frozen until completion of the FEED scope, unless there are significant
enough changes to warrant a rebaseline. Routine changes are expected be absorbed over the course of the work.
The primary reasons for measuring progress during this phase are as follows:




Provide focus to the Project Team regarding progress achieved and identify the status of FEED deliverables
relative to the FEED schedule.
Require the EPMS Contractor to implement a change control process.
Establish project controls expectations and processes with the EPMS Contractor and establish a focus
towards budgets, performance, and schedule.
Ensure elements of scheduling, progress measurement, productivity, and other key controls tools are in place
for the subsequent detailed engineering phase.
NOTE: This phase is one of evolution of the project design with a heavy emphasis on design optimization, and
subsequent changes to schedule and budgets should be anticipated. If changes are significant enough to affect the
critical path, move the Execute Stage Gate or cause a new project forecast completion date, this should be
signaled immediately as changes of this magnitude will require Management of Change, MOC process to be
implemented.
Contractors, who perform the work during FEED sometimes go on to perform detailed engineering. The
processes presented in this document are established during FEED and continue through detailed engineering.
Execute
Execute stage progress measurement is required for engineering, procurement, construction/fabrication,
installation, hook up and commissioning and completes on fulfillment of the scope to first production and
subsequent remaining scope.
Execute stage progress measurement and reporting for facilities without a first production element will be
measured to the extent of the Execute FM.
Execute scope is likely to occur during the Define stage, such as early procurement of long lead items or early
start of detailed engineering. Any Contractor performing Execute scope during Define is required to prepare a
fully resource loaded schedule and implement their progress measurement and reporting system. This progress
shall be reported separately from Define FEED progress as planned vs. actual Execute progress. FEED progress
and Detailed Engineering progress shall not be mixed in any situation as this prevents identification of scope
specific to a CVP stage as per the WBS requirements and prevents benchmarking data collection.
Execute overall progress planned vs. actual reporting during Define will be based on weighted value of the
Execute scope being measured against the estimated total value of Execute. A progress curve will not be
necessary or generated until the Execute baseline is set prior to the Execute Assurance processes.
Minor changes in scope over the course of any phase of the project are expected to be absorbed in the progress
systems. Significant changes in scope may require rebaselining. It is anticipated that a rebaseline effort may
occur at the Define to Execute Stage Gate once all major Execute contracts are ready for award.
The Planning Engineer should take note that any Execute detailed engineering scope planned to start in Define
will require the development of agreed CTRs (Cost Time Resource worksheets), and subsequent list of
deliverables and/or purchase orders to be issued before the Contractor scheduler can provide a resource loaded
schedule. CTR development for Execute scope during Define is sometimes problematic when the team is more
focused on completing FEED deliverables. The BP Planning Engineer shall include the activities for this scope
during the development of the MCS and require contractors to include in their Define/FEED schedules.
Procurement scope occurring during Define will require development of the detailed engineering and
procurement schedule leading up to issue of RFQ and through delivery in support of progress measurement.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 48 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Follow-on engineering, even though it may contain deliverables such as revisions or as-built drawings, is not
included in the progress measurement system.
There are instances where a facility is completed and handed over to Operations while a limited amount of scope
remains over a long period of time. When overall progress reflects 95% complete or remaining scope is forecast
at less than 0.5% per month, the project will move away from overall progress reporting and control the
remaining scope as a discrete scope in line with the progress boundaries as stated in this document.
Execute progress will be aggregated by weighting each Contractor or BP Delivery Area by its approved cost or
estimated Class 2 budgeted value at commencement of Execute scope relative to the total budgeted value of the
Execute Delivery Areas. Execute activities beginning during Define will be weighted with approved estimated
values and updated at the Execute Stage Gate. These weightings shall not be changed during the course of
Execute without a compelling reason (e.g. significant scope growth or reduction). Explicit BP Project
Management approval is required in advance of making any change to the progress weighting.
The BP Lead Planning Engineer will be responsible for aggregating progress at the summary level for facilities
and GWO. (GWO progress measurement and reporting is a deliverable from the Wells team to the Project Team.
The BP Delivery Team Planning Engineers and Contractors will be responsible for aggregating facilities
progress to the WBS Level 3.
GSH as a critical member of the GPO organization will direct their Contractors/suppliers to follow the same
procurement model progress as expected of EPMS Contractors and as further described in this document. GSH
will report a percent complete progress against plan for the scope of their supply to the project within the limits
as prescribed in this document. GSH shall determine what scope of their supply is in support of first production
and segregate accordingly for progress reporting purposes. All other scope shall be reported as a discrete
element and provided to the project for overall progress reporting.
Achieved progress shall be reported against planned/forecast progress along with variances and a narrative
explaining the variances. In the case of an achieved progress shortfall, explanations shall be provided as to what
actions are being taken to recover the schedule.
6.5
Progress Measurement Cycles
Progress measurement cycles are different for each type of work. Engineering Contractors and Fabrication
Contractors have different reporting cycles due to the nature of their respective businesses. BP Planning
Engineers are to ensure that Contractors are updating and reporting measured progress as required in the Project
Coordination Procedures. When not specified, it is highly recommended to use midnight each Saturday for the
weekly cut off and midnight last Saturday of the month for the monthly cut off.
Whereas the current EPMS coordination procedures contracts call for bi-weekly, where possible BP should
encourage engineering and procurement progress to be measured and reported weekly to facilitate more timely
identification of issues as they arise. Engineering, fabrication, construction and hook up shall be measured and
reported by discipline.
6.6
Contractor Progress Systems
Many Contractors have sophisticated integrated database systems for planning, cost, progress measurement and
control. Other smaller or less sophisticated Contractors may be tracking progress via spreadsheet or via earned
manhours in a schedule. Small scale local companies may require guidance from the BP Planning Engineer on
reporting progress but shall report their own progress nonetheless.
It is extremely important to evaluate each Contractors progress measurement and reporting standards to ensure
they are meeting the requirements of their contract and the minimal requirements of this procedure, whether the
Contractor is a sophisticated major Contractor or a smaller shop.
It is required that each Contractor reports its own progress and that the progress is validated by the BP Planning
Team. BP Planning Teams are not permitted to establish progress and operate progress systems for Contractors
nor in any way take any ownership of a Contractors’ progress.
Where a Contractor Integrated Progress Measurement Systems exists, Primavera will not be used to track and
report physical engineering and procurement progress.
BP does not accept negative progress as a part of the contractor reporting. If a contractor over reports progress,
the contractor will continue to report the same cumulative figure until progress catches up to the over reported
figure and normal reporting can resume.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 49 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Engineering
For engineering progress, each EPMS or EPC Contractor shall use their own system for progress measurement.
Progress shall be based on physical progress of detailed engineering deliverables, which is calculated by dividing
earned manhours by budgeted manhours and representing the resultant value as a percentage.
The following chart reflects the typical process and flow of information for an Engineering Contractor’s progress
measurement process:
BP Defines
Scope of Work
Contractor
Develops CTRs
Contractor
Creates Detail
Deliverables
Resources are
Allocated to
Deliverables
(M anhours)
Deliverables are
Scheduled,
Resource Loaded
and Leveled
Progress
Database is
Populated w ith
Deliverables,
Hours, Rules of
Credit
Planned Progress
Curve is
Generated from
Schedule
Actual Hours
Earned are
Reported Against
Progress Plan
It is very important to note that the process begins with BP defining the scope of work and the Contractor
developing CTRs or other estimate basis as required. Sufficient time should be allowed for the review and
approval process of CTRs and/or basis, including allowances for changes by BP. Generally, the one element
driving delivery of a baseline schedule and progress curve is BP finalization and approval of the CTRs or Scope
of Work.
In engineering, the scope of work is comprised of a complete list of all deliverables, not just drawings but also
specifications, requisitions, studies, and so forth. The work is organized by discipline, deliverables, and the
number of workhours it will take to complete each deliverable. Progress is achieved as deliverables milestones
are achieved by progress rules of credit and manhours are earned. Sample rules of credit can be found in
Appendix H Engineering_Rules_of_Credit.
During the progress measurement update cycle, the status of the work achieved for each progress milestone is
determined for each deliverable. The progress measurement system will then calculate a percent complete by
deliverable, subtotaled by discipline, and then be rolled up for the scope of work for the project.
Engineering progress is managed in the same way for Define, FEED and Execute, detailed engineering. FEED
and detailed engineering are not aggregated.
Engineering progress spans from the start of engineering until it has reached 95% physical completion as
determined by the progress measurement database. The 95% point is used as the practical limit on the span since
the determination of an absolute 100% engineering completion can often be difficult. Engineering work will
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 50 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
continue until past Mechanical Completion with ongoing revisions to drawings, as building of drawings and
close-out processes. The period after 95% complete until project completion is known as follow-on engineering
and is not included in the progress measurement system.
The AFC issue of the last document in the progress measurement system should be claimed as 100% complete,
while benchmarking will utilize the 95% complete mandatory milestone across all projects.
All engineering deliverables/drawings including loop diagrams and piping isometrics shall be included in the
progress measurement system with the exception of as built drawings.
At the final stage of engineering progress measurement, special consideration should be given to any of the
deliverables that have been placed on hold and a holds register shall be developed and implemented by the
engineering team to manage final issue of drawings.
6.6.1.1
Engineering Phase Special Considerations
When the Contractor determines the budgeted quantities of the deliverables it is important to allow for knownunknowns when defining the scope of work. This is also known as design allowance.
BP requires Contractors to provide a reasonable allowance for additional drawings and other documents in the
engineering deliverables list. This is part of the design development process. An in-depth review of the
deliverables list shall be conducted to determine whether any allowances or potential hidden contingencies exist.
BP recognizes that allowances for design development are normal and should be expected, but care needs to be
taken to ensure that excessive allowances and contingencies are not factored into the schedule or progress
measurement system.
Contractors shall be required to present their deliverable basis (both quantities and workhours per deliverable)
relative to their historical performance on other similar projects.
The goal is to achieve a progress measurement system that is based on historical performance, includes design
development allowances and excludes hidden contingencies.
Additionally, engineering deliverables and related manhours planned and expended will be collected in support
of BP benchmarking and development of rates and norms.
6.6.1.2
3D CADD Modelling Special Considerations
There are unique requirements for measuring the progress of 3D computer-aided design and drafting (CADD)
work.
Engineering Contractors have struggled with how to accurately reflect the status of 3D design.
The typical approach that most Contractors take is to perform a quantity extract from the model. They then
divide the modeled quantities by the total estimated quantities to find the percent complete.
The Contractor/Planning Engineer should take care when using 3D model quantities, as the quantities extracted
are only representative of the engineering work that has been placed within the model.
Progress measurement systems that are based on incomplete 3D model extracts will overstate the completion
status. Consideration should be made for early MTOs and BoMs (Bill of Materials) that often contain
contingencies of 20-30%. Estimates must be made for the commodities not yet included in the model when
taking this approach.
Commodity quantities, such as pipe spools, tons of steel, pipe supports, cable trays, and so forth, are used not
only to track engineering status but also form the foundation of the progress measurement system that is used to
track progress for the construction or fabrication phase.
As the engineering work is progressed, estimates must be replaced with design quantities until such time as
quantities are fully known and all estimated quantities removed from the measurement system. This is
particularly important in unit rate fabrication or construction scenarios where the quantity budgets are established
by estimated engineering quantities, pending receipt of all design or take off quantities. The budgeting and
progressing of unit rate agreements against estimated quantities is not permitted if known quantities are
available.
6.6.1.3
Follow-On Phase
The follow-on engineering phase is considered a support phase, and progress measurement is not conducted
during this phase. However, the Engineering Contractors do provide support to the fabricators and BP by
assisting with fabrication/construction and operations completion by responding to queries.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 51 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
It is important to note that, in some cases, as-built drawings fall into this phase. The progress of these drawings is
measurable because they are vital for operations, but as-built progress is not part of the detailed engineering and
design progress measurement system and is tracked as a separate element and not included in the overall
engineering progress.
6.7
Procurement
Progress Measurement and Reporting
Procurement progress shall be measured by earned value covering the period from issue of RFQ, Request for
Quote until received onsite.
Unless executed by BP directly procurement progress shall utilize contractor progress measurement systems.
Procurement weighting will be based on the estimated value of the purchase order and frozen upon start of
progress measurement. Minor variances in PO values and promise dates, once known, will be absorbed in the
progress system. Major variances will be evaluated against the progress plan. No adjustments to the progress
plan will be made without BP approval.
Where executed by BP, point systems currently in use by some regions to apply progress weighting to procured
items based on level of effort are an acceptable solution. This progress model shall be made available to projects
by the function when the PEP designates BP as the key provider of procurement services.
Procurement shall be measured by assigning agreed rules of credit/milestones to easily identifiable procurement
steps and applying these percentages to the total purchase order budgeted value as each step is earned. The total
earned values of all purchase orders divided by the total values of all purchase orders will comprise the
procurement progress. BP shall agree the weighting of the procurement steps with the contractor prior to
commencing procurement progress measurement.
Sample rules of credit can be found in Appendix H at Procurement Rules of Credit.
All milestones are completion based and progress credit is earned on the date set for the milestone. No progress
is permitted to be earned between milestones.
The Planning Engineer must not overlook the importance of receiving PO close out documentation including
vendor data and manuals. Many contractor procurement progress systems include a weighted value for this
documentation. As a minimum, receipt of this data should show up in the procurement planning as this is an
integral part of the handover to Operations prior to facility start up and for some equipment prior to facility
commissioning.
Many EPMS Contractors have acceptable procurement progress systems. It is the responsibility of the Planning
Engineer to become familiar with Contractor procurement progress systems to the extent required to assure that
the system outputs meet BP requirements.
Procurement progress is classified as Execute activity.
Procurement Tracking Reports
Procurement progress relates progress against plan as a percent complete. There are so many detailed steps in the
procurement process and often so many items to procure that a percent complete against plan or performance
against a Gantt chart may not provide enough information to effectively control and ensure the procurement
steps are happening in the required time frame. For this reason, it is required that each project develop a
Procurement Tracking Report. The spreadsheet contains the following key dates and durations, as a minimum:
 Purchase order number
 Equipment/Material description
 Supplier
 ROS date
 Lead time in weeks (purchase order to ex works)
 Delivery lead time in weeks (ex-works to onsite)
 RFQ issued to bidders
 Receive quotes
 T&C evaluations complete (technical and commercial)
 Award purchase order
 Vendor data received
 Forecast ex works date
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 52 of 134
© BP p.l.c.
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
The execution and control of the above dates are generally carried out in an engineering office by a specialist
procurement team working directly with BP or Contractor procurement. Once a purchase order is issued,
monitoring and control is generally turned over to an Expediting Team and will involve an Expediting Report.
Where bulk materials are supplied by a fabricator or other contractor, procurement tracking shall also be applied
and whereas contractual provisions do not mandate this, BP will require the fabricator or contractor to reflect
bulk procurement in their schedule.
Expediting Reports
Although not integral to procurement progress calculation, a vital document for tracking a primary interface
between procurement and fabrication/construction is the Contractor Expediting Report. The Expediting Report is
managed by the Expediting Team, who are often heavily involved in dealing with BP logistics and freight
forwarding along with customs, duties and other import/export issues. Each Expediting Team shall create and
maintain the Expediting Report to be issued to BP on an as agreed basis. The Expediting Report will contain as a
minimum:










PO number
Equipment description
Equipment tag numbers (if not bulk materials)
Supplier
Point of origin
Shipping method – overland, air or ocean freight
Forecast ex works date
Forecast arrival onsite date
Actual ex works date
Actual arrival onsite date
All Procurement Tracking Reports and Expediting Reports will be maintained until completion of the last
delivery and then archived with the project documentation as part of the project close-out process. It is a
responsibility of the BP Planning Engineer to collect these documents and file them in the appropriate project
folder or benchmarking systems. This will form an integral part of development of procurement rates and norms.
6.8
Fabrication and Construction
Contractor Progress Basis
Fabrication and construction progress is measured until the overall progress is 100% complete. It is not
uncommon for a project to switch to punchlist completion mode when it reaches 90% to 95% complete.
Nonetheless, overall fabrication/construction progress will not reflect 100% complete until the last MC1 is
signed with the exception of any waivers as agreed or directed by BP management.
Fabrication progress measurement shall be based on discrete identifiable quantities installed as per agreed rules
of credit and include each disciplines’ progress summated to total fabrication progress. Progress shall be
aggregated using earned manhours. Reported progress shall be easily correlated with the fabrication control
schedule.
It is imperative that the BP Planning Engineer validates rules of credit as fair and balanced relative to the level of
effort. Often, a Contractor will try to ‘front load’ the rules to gain progress percentage early on, particularly when
payment is tied to progress. Typically, a front loaded progress measurement system is in the best interest of the
Contractor, leading to earlier payments that improve their cash flow. But early payments may result in poor
behaviors where toward the end of a Project, little money remains to be paid while the most difficult work is yet
to be performed.
Examples of balanced fabrication rules of credit can be found in Appendix H, Construction Rules of Credit.
Most BP top-tier Contractors have internal systems for estimating, measuring and reporting progress. These
systems should not be overlooked but should as a minimum meet the guidance laid out in this document.
A quality progress measurement and reporting system is based on the following:


A definitive cost estimate showing detailed work quantities and workhour breakdowns
Detailed schedules
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 53 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure

An execution plan of how the work is to be performed
The technique for measuring and reporting construction progress is usually a variation of an earned value system
that encompasses the following two basic measurables:


Physical quantities
Manhours based on recognized norms
At a basic level, construction progress can be demonstrated as:
Construction Progress = Equivalent Quantity Installed X 100%
Total Quantity
The resultant percent complete multiplied by the manhour budget yields earned manhours. Earned manhours
divided by total manhours yields project percent complete.
Manhours are used to convert the various discipline quantities to a common unit of measure for summating
progress by discipline.
The physical quantities established and manhours estimated before a fabrication/construction schedule is
baselined, although estimated quantities are often used when engineering and fabrication/construction phases
overlap. Care must be shown to replace estimated quantities with take-off quantities as soon as the engineering
information is sufficiently developed.
Contractors will have different methods of gathering actual hours spent to execute work, either by direct hired
labor or by subcontracted labor. The level at which this is gathered will dictate the level at which productivity
can be reported. (See section 6.16 for more on calculation of productivity.)
Some fabrication contracts use a milestone progress and payment system where physical progress is not
measured on a weekly or even monthly basis but is based on reaching specific milestones in the fabrication
process. This is typically seen in shipyard fabrication of ships and hulls. Care must be taken to ensure a sufficient
level of definition of the milestones exists to support validation that the milestone has been reached before
granting the progress.
Whatever method is used to measure construction progress, the Contractor should be checked carefully against
the standards. Overbooking of progress can be performed in a variety of ways, such as the following by:



Giving artificially high weighting to front-end activities
Making inadequate allowances for back-end cleanup work
Generating extra work orders during construction
Engineering work and the initial estimate are usually structured by deliverables (drawings, specifications, and so
forth) and systems, but construction is controlled by area of work and discipline. Therefore, the initial estimate
must be structured by work area consistent with the execution plans. The BP Planning Engineer shall give
careful consideration to the number of areas required. Too many areas will be cumbersome to monitor, while too
few may not provide the detail necessary to control the project. Such areas, however, should be self-contained,
measured, and have a single point of accountability.
6.9
Construction Completion and Systems Handover
The contractor deliverable the stage of Systems handover is an MC schedule based on commissioning priorities.
The MC schedule shall include an allowance for the time required for the handover process, including walk
downs, punchlisting and punch item close outs and final acceptance. Likewise, the BP commissioning schedule
will also include the appropriate activities to accommodate handover of SH1s to Operations.
The MC schedule and MC skyline (as described in the next section) must be available to commissioning no later
than 60% fabrication/construction complete recognizing that construction will not begin systems completion
until around 70% complete.
The BP Delivery Area Planning Engineer and the Commissioning Planning Engineer, working with construction
shall verify that the MC dates provided by the contractor are based on a logic driven plan.
The interface between MC and commissioning will have to be continually monitored and forecast as the
contractor approaches MC completion mode.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 54 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
The Contractor progress system shall retain as a minimum 5% of overall progress to be earned on sign off of the
MC1 certificates. The 5% can be retained at the discipline level or at the overall progress level and can be earned
as a ratio of MC1s complete vs. total MC1s and will be a reflection of the punchlist close out progress.
After the (final) MC1 is issued, the project systems are energized and the static commissioning occurs. Static
commissioning is when the systems are being functionally tested. Often there will be outstanding MC1s whilst
the commissioning team is ready to proceed with functional testing. At this point the facility may be managed by
a permit to work system to allow parts of the facility to be energized and commissioned while other parts are
being mechanically completed.
Overlapping construction and commissioning not only introduces new risks to safety but almost always
introduces inefficiencies to both construction and commissioning teams and should be avoided when schedule
allows. When the schedule forecast indicates that there will be excessive overlap of construction and
commissioning and forecast delays due to congestion, safety or other considerations, the Contractor and
commissioning team are required to revisit the plan and develop work around solutions to preserve schedule and
not delay the project. Resulting productivity allowances shall be clearly identified, applied and factored into
subsequent forecasting.
6.10
Commissioning Progress
The process of preparing a facility to be handed over to Operations and to undergo start up activity is called the
Commissioning phase. Commissioning is performed after construction or fabrication of each system. The
Commissioning phase is divided into two types of work; static commissioning and dynamic commissioning.
Metrics play a key part in tracking the status of commissioning including measuring number of loops or I/Os
complete vs. total and to-go, numbers of motor run- ins, and other key Completion Management System check
sheets that provide a good indication of progress although commissioning is progressed as per earned manhours
similar to construction/fabrication. Tracking manhours earned is key to understanding productivity and future
manpower and duration requirements.
Just as the MC plan must be logic driven, the commissioning plan must be referenced back to the MC plan to
provide clear indication of any MC slippage driving the commissioning plan out.
Dynamic commissioning is the testing of a system and is tracked numerically based on number of systems
completed. The scope of dynamic commissioning is fluid, and there is significant troubleshooting involved. The
standard process used is to track work by using a numerical-based system that is comprised of a completion
matrix and schedule. This process allows a Planning Engineer to provide a sequence, status, and timetable for the
work that needs to be completed during the Commissioning phase.
The following table is a sample of a mechanical completion and commissioning planning and tracking process
often referred to as ‘Manhattan Skyline’. Systems are scheduled for completion based on commissioning
priorities. The stacked dates below represent system handover dates to the start up team where a system is
completely commissioned.
202+01
303+01
304+01
306+01
310+01
402+05
207+03
308+03
402+07
208+02
208+01
705+01
701+01
302+01
311+01
305+01
312+03
707+01
308+04
406+01
312+04
305+02
308+01
110+01
508+01
508+02
508+03
508+04
18-Apr-11
25-Apr-11
2-May-11
4-Apr-11
401+01
402+01
302+01
311+01
307+05
307+06
706+01
704+01
312+01
311+02
404+01
405+01
407+01
11-Apr-11
307+04
402+06
409+01
309+07
511+02
504+01
401+01
402+01
403+02
307+01
503+01
509+01
602+01
312+02
509+03
28-Mar-11
High Priority Commissioning System
Medium Priority Commissioning System
Low Priority Commissioning System
Forecast
Complete
Sample of Manhattan Skyline
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 55 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
The chart shows plan, actual and forecast dates for Mechanical Completion of each system and subsequent
handover to commissioning. The numbers in the boxes represent project assigned system numbers.
Commissioning progress is tracked in a Skyline. Systems progress is simply systems completed divided by total
systems and represented as a percent complete. This applies to both MC1 and SH1 progress.
For offshore facilities, commissioning will be completed to the greatest extent possible in the fabrication yard,
but final commissioning will likely not complete until the facility integration is complete. Integration could take
place in the same fab yard, another fab yard or offshore (e.g. a SPAR hull and topsides cannot be integrated at
quayside). On the other hand, onshore facilities can generally progress from start of commissioning to
completion and start up.
Commissioning completes with the handover of the last System Handover Certificate (SH1) to the Operations
start up team.
Subsea equipment commissioning is measured differently. SIT, Systems Integration Testing for Subsea
Equipment is often conducted at or near quayside and is a major element of work before taking subsea
equipment offshore. Progress for this event is schedule and achieved milestone based. Specific SIT activities
will be progress weighted to reflect the level of effort required to complete the work.
6.11
Installation and Hook Up Progress
For offshore projects, integration takes place after the fabrication or construction phase. However, it is important
to note that not all projects will have an integration phase. Integration applies when a project’s components are
fabricated or constructed separately and then must be joined together as part of a single assembly. An example of
this would be the topsides and hull for an offshore facility. The integration phase is always pressure intensive and
time-sensitive. Identifying the scope of work and using a thorough tracking system is key to the integration of
activities.
Integration typically involves the assembly of the topsides and hull components as shown in the figure below.
After all the modules have been set, all mechanical, electrical, and instrument interconnections must be made and
tested to hook up the facility prior to commissioning of the facility.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 56 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Integration Process
Offshore installation, hook up and commissioning progress is often measured in earned quantities, manhours or
milestones depending the type of work being executed.
Installation Progress
Installation of topsides, hulls, and jackets typically involve Heavy Lift Vessels (HLVs). Progress of these
installations are generally planned to complete within short time periods, often within one or two reporting
cycles. In most cases of mega project offshore activity, progress for installation activity is weighted by the value
of the activity, often related to the contract value for the installation vessels and progressed by earned days
against the overall installation schedule.
Progress reporting involves reporting scheduled physical progress against the schedule and is fairly straight
forward. Contractors ‘earn’ days for work completed. If a Contractor has a total duration of 75 days and
completes 15 days of schedule work (not days passed, but days for which the planned work is complete), then the
Contractor is 20% complete (i.e. 15/75). The original duration is set as a baseline and not changed without a
rebaseline. If an owner adds 3 days of scope for example, it is expected these 3 days will be absorbed in the
schedule and will not be reflected as progress days or change the original total duration basis. Major scope
changes adding a significant number of days to the progress basis will have to be adopted via a rebaseline.
In essence, the Planning Engineer can take the number of days of work that has been completed (not days
passed) and divide by the total planned duration to arrive at a percent complete.
Installation Contractors may have their own progress measurement systems which are suitable for tracking and
reporting the work. If the contractor system meets BP requirements for physical progress, BP Planning
Engineers will take full advantage of these systems as they represent a key component of managing the
contractor to their commitments.
Pipelay and Subsea Progress
Export pipelay, flowline, gas lift lines, and water injection line installation activites are other activities that often
go quickly and may be planned linearly if the installation campaign is within one or two reporting cycles. Linear
implies progress is planned and distributed linearly over time.
For longer installation campaigns (greater than one or two reporting periods), it is better practice to plan pipelay
progress based on linear meters or feet installed and include rules of credit for fabrication and/or spooling of line
pipe, loading and transport, handling, installing, testing and hook up.
Rules of credit should be applied to onshore fabrication of line pipe when applicable (e.g. onshore make up of
strings of pipe or spooling pipe onto reels for reel lay). Manufacture or coating of pipe should not be measured as
part of installation but rather be progresses as part of procurement.
Progress measure of flowline and pipelay activities shall include:








Prefab – make up of sections/strings, insulating pipe in pipe (does not include coating)
Spooling
Transport (delivery to or by lay vessel)
Pipelay (S Lay, J Lay, Reel Lay)
Pigging, flushing, running gauge plate
Hydrotest
Tie-ins
Leak test, dewatering
Progress reporting is a requirement of the installation contract. Rules of credit will be provided by the
Installation Contractors and agreed with BP. The subsea Planning Engineer shall validate the rules of credit and
progress system and subsequently validate offshore progress with the Project Team. The BP Planning Engineer
will be responsible for aggregating subsea progress for the total subsea scope in line with the project WBS.
Subsea equipment installation should be progress weighted by contract value and progressed by each component
installed, except in the cases where there is a wide variance of complexity between the types of equipment to be
installed. In a large installation campaign spanning many reporting periods, progressing small mudmat type skids
vs. suction pile connected manifolds will require progress weighting relative to the level of effort required for
each. Again, deciding factors include complexity and length of campaign.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 57 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Riser pull-ins fall into the same category as HLV campaigns and shall be based on contract value for weighting
roll up and progressed against schedule performance (i.e. days earned/budgeted days). Rules of credit will be
established for tie-ins and testing.
Jumper, umbilical and flying leads installation will be weighted as per installation contract value and progressed
by each for jumpers and flying leads and meters/feet for umbilicals and apply rules of credit for tie-ins and
testing. Charging umbilicals is part of the commissioning progress and not included in the installation
measurement.
Hook Up Progress
Hook up progress is similar to Brownfield scope in the use of work packs for planning and progress
measurement. Work packs are used to identify and list each discrete scope of work, calculate hours to complete
the work, determine manpower requirements and plan the work in the schedule. As work is completed per each
work pack, the work pack hours are earned and measured against the total manhour budget to determine
progress. Work packs will span all disciplines and are to be ‘systemized’ to support mechanical completion and
commissioning activities.
Projects are permitted to use job cards to estimate and capture progress as long as they roll up to workpack levels
which can then be summated to overall progress.
A summary ledger shall be maintained for aggregating all work pack progress.
The total manhours earned by work packs divided by the total work pack budget yields hookup percent
complete.
See Appendix H Workpack for example of work pack and ledger. Offshore projects involving IHUC will
require a roll up to the IHUC WBS for progress reporting. Each element of installation, hook up and
commissioning shall be weighted based on their contract value to facilitate roll up. Progress weighting and units
of measure for offshore IHUC are listed in Appendix H Installation.
6.12
Drilling and Completions Progress Measurement
Drilling and Completions progress is the cumulative progress and incremental progress covering the scope for
the wells required for first production. Post first production drilling and completions will be measured as a
separate activity set. The drilling and completions progress plan and measurement process will be as defined by
GWO and is not a part of this document.
6.13
Overall Progress Measurement
Overall Progress is the aggregate of the progress of each Level 3 WBS element to an overall progress percentage
complete for the project. The roll up of the progress to total project begins at the lowest progress level, typically
Contractor discipline or work packages. Contractors disciplines roll up to Contractor overall. The Contractors
contributing progress to a Delivery Area are then rolled up to Delivery Area progress. Delivery Area progress is
rolled up to overall progress. Obviously, large, complex projects with many Level 3 WBS elements can have a
tremendous amount of data underpinning the overall project progress.
Define
Overall progress aggregating begins in Define. Define progress is the measurement of FEED. Aggregating
Define progress begins with establishing the progress weighting of each FEED Delivery Area (when more than
one). The Delivery Areas are weighted relative to the original control budget of the work. Once a baseline budget
is established as part of the estimating process, it is frozen and not changed unless as part of a rebaseline effort,
i.e., changes to the budget are not reflected in changes to the progress weighting until preparation for the next
stage gate or as a requirement for a rebaseline.
Physical progress is determined through the Contractors’ deliverables based progress measurement system. The
physical progress is applied to the original control budgets to determine the earned value. The earned value is
then summed and converted to a percentage. Define progress reporting should include cumulative and period
plan, actual and variance.
Execute
Aggregating Execute overall progress is much the same as Define except that the Execute progress has many
layers of progress to aggregate before arriving at overall Execute progress. The principal is the same as Define
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 58 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
progress; physical progress is applied to the original control budgets to determine budget earned. The earned
budgets are summed to total earned, and total earned divided by total budget is the overall percent complete. The
Contractors will report to at least to one level below and roll up to each phase (phase being Engineering,
Procurement, Construction, etc.). At this stage, there will be thousands to tens of thousands of records
underpinning this progress information.
Respective Contractors will have aggregated and reported their own progress to the Level 3 progress. The
Delivery Area Planning Engineers will be responsible for validating Contractor progress. Note that GSH
progress is included as a component of Subsea procurement and will be required to be shown as a unique
progress element.
As previously mentioned, there will be delineation in contractor progress reporting between scope required for
first production and all scope. Contractor first production scope shall be aggregated to facilitate reporting
progress and schedule performance against first production. In most cases the first production scope will
represent 100% of the scope of a contractor in which case no delineation will be required. Examples would be
offshore floating systems or fixed structures or onshore processing facilities. Where more than one facility is
required, the WBS will naturally divide the first facility (production) from the second.
6.14
Progress Curves
The planning process of schedule development and resource loading/leveling culminates in the ability to measure
schedule performance against plan as described in the previous section. This performance is shall be displayed in
a graphic curve indicating plan, actual and forecast progress.
Early Curves
The Early Finish approach produces the Early Start Curve based on early start dates. Just as BP works to early
dates, Contractors are required to report progress against the early start dates.
The primary advantage of using the Early Start Curve is that the curve represents the earliest possible time an
activity may begin. The primary disadvantage of the Early Start Curve is that resources must be front end loaded
to meet the early timing requirements. As a result, it is not unusual for progress to be behind the early curve
when risk events arise or a Contractor has resource or productivity issues. This adds all the more importance to
vetting Contractor schedules to ensure they contain the appropriate amount of schedule allowances, are not
aggressive and are seen as achievable by the project team.
The Planning Engineer should recognize that being behind progress on an early curve is not always a bad thing
as long as the schedule critical path is being maintained and the erosion of free float on the end is not forecast to
impact the schedule critical path.
Early/Late Curves (Progress Envelopes)
The opposite of the Early Start Curve is the Late Start Curve, which is generated by using late start and finish
dates instead of early dates. The Late Start Curve is very dangerous because this curve represents the latest
possible time activities may begin, effectively removing the float and making every activity critical. It is for this
reason Contractors are required to report against the Early Start Curve. Measuring progress against the late
curves or a mid-point of early and late effectively removes schedule float and therefore is not permitted.
Physical progress can be achieved on non-critical activities of the ‘wrong work’, putting the schedule at risk.
Although a narrow gap may exist between the early and late envelope the opportunity exists for the contractor to
“pick the low hanging fruit” at the expense of progressing the critical path.
The project’s end date may have slipped even though the project appears ahead if the work done did not include
critical path activities. This is often referred do as doing out-of-sequence work. Many times a Contractor will be
behind schedule percent complete and reallocate resources to targeted, often easily achieved progress. It is
important that the Planning Engineer understand where the progress is being earned, whether critical, non-critical
or out-of-sequence work and inform management. The Planning Engineer should use remaining duration of
critical path activities to reanalyze the schedule and ensure that the project’s end date has not changed, critical
durations shortened or the critical path moved.
An additional issue that is very common in the generation of late curves are the capabilities of the Planning
Engineer. An accurate late curve requires very sound logic, limited use of constraints, and a resource leveled
schedule. Without really ‘tight’ logic, the late curve will not be accurate. Nonetheless, BP require contractors
show the late curve as a barometer of the network’s integrity and to trigger as a mechanism for a recovery or
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 59 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
mitigation plan should the actual progress intercept the late curve. Late curves will often reveal schedule logic
shortcomings as indicated by an excessive area between the early and late curves.
Forecast Curves
A forecast curve is the continuation the actual progress curve up to the point of completion. Forecast curves are
mandatory requirements of any progress curve reporting and will give a clear indication of project completion in
line with the schedule forecast (Gantt chart forecast bar end dates and progress forecast curve end dates will be
the same). Percent completes per period shall be easily related to the manpower planned per period in the
forecast to give a clear indication of the contractors plan to increase manpower or take other action to maintain or
recover schedule.
Forecast curves that extend past the completion date have to be assessed independently as to schedule impact.
Part of the understanding of the forecast must include the knock on effect of completion dates later than planned.
If this schedule is detailed engineering, the loop diagrams are driving completion and the loop diagrams have
significant float against the need date at site, a late finish may have no impact on schedule.
On the other hand, if the forecast finish is the fabrication of a module or hull tied to a contracted sailaway date,
red flags must be raised as this result will require urgent remediation or contractual changes should this not be
mitigated or recoverable to the original sailaway date. At the least, this could increase carryover work and hook
up duration, thereby driving installation and hook up costs and duration much higher.
Forecast curves shall be reflected for any and all curves provided as part of the reporting system. BP planning
engineers responsible for aggregate progress shall aggregate forecast curves as well.
Overall Progress Curves
Aggregating progress curves requires the BP Planning Engineers to build a template that applies the Delivery
Area progress weighting to the Delivery Area curves as provided by the responsible Contractor.
The overall progress is summated from a progress reporting Excel worksheet or database template. The
worksheet is initially populated from the Contractors baseline progress curves and then updated with actuals on a
monthly basis. Once the baseline is populated in the BP reporting template, it is frozen for the duration of the
scope and subsequently manually populated with actual figures from the Contractors weekly/monthly reports.
Samples of the progress worksheets are provided in the Planning Engineers toolkit at the CoP website.
Although manual population of progress percent complete and actuals may seem an antiquated process, there is
valid reason to conduct the work in this fashion. Firstly, it is not unheard for a Contractor to ‘tweak’ its baseline
plan as it reports to the owner each reporting period. Establishing the baseline plans in a BP file and freezing the
data eliminates any risk of this happening without being noticed by the BP Planning Engineer. Secondly, manual
input provides an immediate indication to the Planning Engineer of not only variances but any discrepancy in
reporting between the baseline and current reported data.
6.15
Progress and Manpower Reporting
Whether the phase is engineering or fabrication and construction, determining manpower level requirements
shall be an output of the resource loaded schedule. The resources loaded into a schedule should be directly
convertible to direct manpower requirements by dividing the weekly required schedule resources by the
scheduled work week hours. The result is full time equivalent (FTE) manpower. This function is also directly
available from within Primavera.
Likewise, manpower limitations shall have a direct correlation with planned schedule durations.
A common expectation is that there will always be alignment between progress status and the direct manpower
plan. If there is a shortage of manpower and a shortfall in progress, it might be determined that the manpower
shortage has led to the progress shortfall. This comparison is a main advantage of showing the manpower plan
and actual manpower on the same graphic as the progress plan and progress actual.
At the same time, manpower levels may not always be directly correlated to progress status. Site progress could
have proper manpower levels but low productivity and subsequent low progress due to weather conditions, for
example. It is required for the Planning Engineer to assess the situation and report any discrepancy between
planned progress and manpower.
A Contractor will often report indirect manpower as well but it is required that indirect and direct manpower are
clearly distinguished.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 60 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Progress and Manpower reporting samples are included in Appendix H Manpower Reporting.
6.16
Productivity Measurement and Reporting
Fully integrated planning and scheduling provides the information required to report plan vs. actual progress,
forecast schedule completion dates based on progress trends and schedule analysis and facilitates reporting plan
vs. actual resource requirements and ultimately measures the efficiency of the resources via productivity reports.
Once deliverables or work scope have been scheduled, resources assigned and work commenced, the progress
system will yield earned manhours for the scope as it is delivered. A comparison of workhours earned to actual
direct workhours expended yields a productivity index. The calculation for earned productivity is:
_Expended Workhours_
= Productivity Index
Earned Workhours
Productivity Index is calculated for both period and cumulative.
The calculation for cumulative productivity is:
Cumulative Budgeted Workhours = Cumulative Productivity
Cumulative Earned Workhours
Note: Workhours can be substituted with value
When measuring against the base index, productivity less than 1.0 is considered good while productivity greater
than 1.0 is considered poor.
The following graph represents a typical detailed productivity curve to be included in Contractor reporting
systems when required by contract. The shape of this curve is typical due to the learning curve and gearing up of
the work at the beginning until such time the project is fully staffed and functionally operational. Productivity
will tend to decrease as a project nears completion due to loss of efficiency as the project winds down and more
efforts are made on closing out details, removing holds and getting the final deliverables out the door.
Productivity Index - Period and Cumulative
Plan
Period
Productivity
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Typical Productivity Curve
It is critical that the resource loading in the plan and the baseline estimate match to track changes and manage
change control effectively. In the event a contractor wishes to baseline their plan with a productivity factor other
than 1:00 applied to the man-hours, the BP planning engineer must ensure that the contractor’s base estimate has
been updated to reflect this productivity as the estimate is the master data from which the resource loading
information is extracted. It is also worth noting that this would potentially restrict comparing performance with
other projects and would be more open to contractor manipulation of performance data. It is more common to
apply a productivity factor to a forecast once performance standards and trends have been established on the
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 61 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
project. The planning engineer is required to validate whether productivity was used in developing the plan and
that the subsequent budgets used in the planning are equal to the estimate. Furthermore, when productivity is
understood and applied to the forecast, the planning engineer is required to validate that manpower projects
reflect this productivity and that the revised manhours are reflected in the estimate.
When productivity is forecast to be less than planned or less than optimal, the implication is either an increase in
required manpower or an extension of schedule duration. When the schedule duration is impacted by
productivity, the planning engineer shall note in the Primavera Notes feature which activities were extended due
to poor productivity and the productivity measure driving the duration out.
A critical reminder is that BP does not recognize indirect contributions to productivity. Productivity is only
measured against direct manhours. The planning engineer is responsible for validating that no indirect manhours
are being included in the productivity measure.
Performance of indirect effort (be it rigging, scaffolding, supervision, non-working foremen and the like) should
not be completely ignored. Unmanaged indirect expenditure on a category A project could have detrimental
effects beyond budget overrun. Unmanaged and unchecked indirect labour could be used to ‘mask’ direct
productivity reporting, could potentially affect labour density and as such progress or even safety. The planning
engineer is required to validate that indirect manpower are being reported and noting the ratio of indirects to
directs as too many indirects will negatively impact productivity and could also restrict use of direct crafts in a
limited POB/headcount situation.
6.17
BP Monthly Reporting
BP and Contractor reporting information requirements are defined by the Global GPO Project Execution
Management. The intent of this section is to highlight the contribution of the Planning Engineers and Project
Teams to the reporting process.
BP formal progress reporting begins with the first monthly reporting period on entering the Define stage. It is
recognized that due to time to pull together the reporting requirements, this may not necessarily be in the first
month or two of Define. Define stage progress reporting will focus on performance management of FEED
Contractors by reporting plan and actual progress for cumulative and period with variances for each FEED
Delivery Area and summating to an overall FEED progress. Productivity reporting is also a requirement of the
Define stage report.
The FEED progress plan will be provided by the responsible Contractor and originate from a Level 3 resource
loaded schedule. Data will be input into a summary progress worksheet where the aggregating of FEED progress
will occur.
Certain Execute activities are likely to begin during the Define stage such as long lead procurement and early
detailed engineering. Execute activities occurring during Define will be reported as discreet elements employing
both metrics tracking and reporting of percentage complete. The Contractor carrying out the early execute work
will be required to develop Execute detailed engineering and/or procurement progress curves during Define from
which plan and actual progress and variance will be reported. Additional procurement metrics will include plan
and actual release of RFQs and purchase orders and other metrics as designated by the project. Detailed
engineering plan vs. actual progress and manpower will be reported as a separate line item if the actual scope is
defined, CTRs are approved, curves are generated and detailed engineering actually starts during Define. Any
other Execute elements (fabrication, site prep, etc.) will be reported as Execute Stage WBS elements.
The follow diagram reflects the roll up of Level 3 and 4 Contractor monthly reporting inputs to the overall
project monthly report.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 62 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Additional Performance Metrics
Progress curves will be supplemented with secondary metrics to give an indication on current forecast
completion date and monthly performance trends. Projects will determine which metrics to include in the
reporting under the guidance of Execute Management.
Examples of metrics to include are:











Planned RFQs issues vs. actual RFQs issued
Planned purchase orders issued vs. actual purchase orders issued
Planned vs. actual AFC drawings, isometrics, loop diagrams, etc. issued
Planned vs. actual material ordered and delivered
Planned vs. actual cubic meters of concrete placed
Planned vs. actual tons of structural steel erected
Planned vs. actual piping spools fabrication and/or erected
Planned vs. actual meters/feet of pipelay, reel lay, J lay, etc. (for long duration pipelay)
Planned vs. actual loop checks and/or function checks completed by system
Planned vs. actual systems mechanical completions (MC1s signed)
Planned vs. actual systems handover (SH1s signed)
Metric reporting is not permitted to be used to convert to a percent complete and report as physical progress.
Physical progress applies level of effort to measurement and reporting of progress. Metrics are not reflective of
variances in complexity or level of effort. As an example, a 2” piping spool fab and erect earns far less progress
than a 24” yet the metric reporting typically only counts “each.” This is not reflective of the level of effort
required to do the work or the difference in progress earned for a 2” pipe spool compared to a 24” pipe spool.
Schedule Status
A schedule narrative will be included in each Delivery Area and the executive summary sections of the BP
monthly reports addressing as a minimum the following topics:
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 63 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure







Describe reasons ahead / behind progress variance.
Identify which Delivery Teams are performing ahead / behind the baseline
Describe unusual drawdown of schedule contingency; total float or any free float
Discuss whether schedule issues are a result of isolated events, known/unknown risks materializing,
performance/productivity trends, etc.
Describe recovery plans anticipated if actual progress is behind planned
The likely impact or non-impact on the First Production Date
Issues and concerns
Planning Engineers are required to document the above issues as part of their daily responsibilities and not wait
on reporting cycles to raise these issues as concerns.
BP progress reporting shall include a Schedule Performance Indicators as depicted in the below tables.
Following each table are formulas for the indicated values.
Table A is for reporting schedule performance leading up to First Production while Table B reports schedule
performance post First Production.
Table A
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 64 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Table B
Definitions for Formulae
Baseline MCS Date
1st Production date determined by project team from Master Control
Schedule and approved for project baseline.
EFM Approval Date
Date of issue of the Execute Finance Memorandum and start date for the
Execute phase.
PT Date
Performance Target date for 1st Production as stated in EFM.
NTE Date
Not to Exceed target date for 1st Production as stated in EFM.
Current MCS Forecast Date
Current forecast of 1st Production date determined by project team from
Master Control Schedule.
Schedule indicator and contingency allocated values less than 1.0 are generally good while greater than 1 is
negative.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 65 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
For pre-first production, the schedule indicator value is the proportion of total duration usage up to the
Performance Target. Ideally, this value will remain within a reasonable range of the Master Control Schedule
MCS target date. A ratio increasing towards 1.0 indicates performance is deteriorating against the MCS. Ratios
decreasing towards the MCS commitment are an indication of improving performance.
For post first production, the schedule indicator is a measure of the current forecast against the original baseline.
Schedule contingency drawdown represented by contingency allocated should always be less than the percent
complete. Rising contingency allocation early in a project is an indication of scope growth, unforeseen events
occurring or insufficient allowances built into the MCS and should be avoided.
On a monthly basis, the CSI and CAI are to be compared to the previous month to indicate the trend of project
performance against the MCS and contingency usage. Declining values are positive, increasing values are
negative.
Progress measurement planned and actual percent completes and curves in conjunction with the Schedule
Performance Indicators metrics will enable early indications on schedule achievability. Any variance, good or
bad shall be fully investigated and described.
Examples of typical reporting graphics and tables can be found in Appendix H Overall Progress
Measurement.
7
Rebaselining
If the project undergoes sufficient scope or schedule changes such that comparison against the original baseline
no longer adds value then the project will conduct a rebaseline by establishing a revised baseline. All rebaselines
affecting the first production or end date of a project must be approved by the VP Project Appraisal (for BPOperated Project Appraise / Select Projects), the VP Project Execution (for BP-Operated Define / Execute
Projects). Projects will save a version of the original baseline schedule to support variance analysis against the
LTP or GFO along with trending schedule variance over time.
Rebaselining is strongly discouraged in a project but sometimes necessary. Stage gates are generally an
acceptable timing for rebaselining schedules as uncertainties have generally been reduced, scope definition has
increased and future contract cost and schedules become available from Contractors.
Rebaselining is the process of re-establishing activity and milestone schedule dates. Rebaselining may entail
developing a recovery plan (same scope of work), establishing a major schedule revision due to a revised scope
of work, or rescheduling the project based on a revised completion date (earlier or later).
Rebaselining is a very serious issue within BP. No Contractor shall be allowed to rebaseline any part of a project
without explicit and documented agreement with BP.
The 2 scenarios described in this section include:

Rebaseline a schedule due to scope growth due to approved variances (not creep) without changing the
overall end date
 Rebaselining a schedule due to major scope growth or events changing the end date
Rebaselines are not to be confused with forecasting as rebaselining is considered a ‘fresh start’, while forecasting
is a natural component of progress tracking and measurement.
Many times a Contractor will request to rebaseline a project when progress falls behind plan and the progress
reporting no longer makes sense. Although the root cause for the failure to meet plan should be well understood
before allowing a Contractor to rebaseline, rebaselining may be an acceptable option if the Contractor’s scope of
work is not on the project critical path. If the Contractor scope is on the critical path, all work-around solutions
must be explored and exhausted before advancing to the point of rebaselining.
Options for recovering schedule before taking a decision to rebaseline might include:





Adding personnel
Adding shifts, overtime, weekend work
Adding additional Contractors
Reducing non-critical scope, deferring critical scope that can be completed safely after original target
completion date
Rebaselining may or may not change interim milestone or completion dates. The schedule must be assessed
against the key critical dates.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 66 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Projects shall be rebaselined if meeting the targets in the original plan is no longer possible. Having a degree of
tension in a project schedule is good strategy for maintaining control but adherence to a plan where targets are
clearly not achievable is counterproductive. Only achievable plans are useful.
Consider rescheduling a project if any of the following conditions apply:




Progress falls substantially behind planned and is deemed non-recoverable.
Significant change occurs in scope / duration or timing of key activity (e.g. change in concept and scope
changed cannot be absorbed within the original duration).
Meeting the original targets is no longer possible (e.g. major risk event occurs, HLV sinks, dropped module,
Contractor bankruptcy, permitting denied, political unrest, major industrial action, etc.).
The actual performance and/or progress of the project changes so much from the base plan that a comparison
to the base plan becomes misleading. This may be initiated by a significant addition or deletion of the scope
of work, poor productivity, significant out-of-sequence work, unplanned external events (strikes, hurricanes,
civil unrest, and so forth), serious material and/or equipment delivery problems, and so forth.
Poor planning and poor productivity by a Contractor will not be an acceptable excuse for re-baselining a project
until such time as all work around solutions are exhausted.
Rebaselining is not the periodic (e.g. weekly) update of lower level sub-networks (working schedules) to reflect
actual status, short term execution strategies, and current performance.
When or if a project or sub-project is rebaselined, the original schedule and progress, productivity, and resource
curves shall be maintained in the reports (and the project history), just as the original budget estimate
(appropriation estimate or original control estimate) is maintained during the life of the project. The original
baselines and manpower plans shall not be removed from any report or graphic. The only exception to this rule
is when a project is completely rebaselined.
The required approach when a project or sub-project is to be rebaselined is for the new or re-planned metrics
curves start at the beginning of the period when the rescheduling effort occurred. The affected progress curves
will, therefore, show a vertical drop (or rise) at the beginning of this reporting period. As a result, the period
progress and productivity will continue to reflect the ‘real’ information at the time of the measurement and not
be masked by the occurrence(s) causing the project to be rebaselined. In essence, at the time of rebaselining, plan
is set equal to actual and productivity measurement resumes anew.
Contractor rebaselining will be included in the total progress roll up and reporting to maintain the integrity of the
report.
Contractor rebaselines may not have a significant enough weight or be on the critical path, thereby not
warranting a rebaseline of the Master Control Schedule. These occurrences will have to be evaluated on a case
by case basis.
Projects that are behind schedule but viewed to be recoverable use recovery plans to develop a forecast
curve and should not be allowed to rebaseline unless the reporting no longer makes sense.
7.1
Recovery Plans
There may come a time in a project where the recoverable forecast is significantly different from the original
plan and reporting actual progress against original plan no longer makes sense or no longer adds value to the
reporting. In this case, the Contractor may be allowed to report actual progress against the forecast, but the
original plan curve shall always be maintained on the curve graphic and included in the reporting. In a situation
where a Contractor is reporting actual progress against forecast, the report shall clearly indicate this as the case.
The reporting will be actual vs. forecast rather than actual vs. plan. The contractor shall continue to show the
forecast curve bridging actual to completion.
It is required that a forecast recovery plan is accompanied by the basis and assumptions required to support the
forecast curve including manpower plans, shift changes, additional subcontracting, etc. It is a requirement that
the recovery plan is clearly reflected in the schedule and the reforecast curve is a product of the resource loaded
schedule, reflecting the adjustments made to support the reforecast.
Approved forecasting will be rolled up in the BP progress reporting system. All BP and Contractor curves and
histograms related to progress and manpower shall continue to show baseline plan, forecast plan and achieved
progress.
See Appendix I for rebaseline practices and guidelines.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 67 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
8
Project Governance and Assurances
The BP internal assurance process requires a series of reviews, events and meetings to receive authorization to
proceed through the various CVP stage gates. The Master Control Schedule development shall include these key
milestones and the Level 2 activities leading up to verification reviews. This section of the PSP provides an
overview of the planning requirements in support of the Cost and Schedule Verification Review, IPA review
(External Benchmarking), the Project Services Discipline Review and the 6 Monthly Bottoms-Up Review. The
general timing of the review requirements are set forth in the Project Review Meeting (PRM) Process document
(GPO-PC-PRO-00020).
8.1
Cost and Schedule Verification Review
BP uses the Schedule Risk Analysis to determine the appropriate schedule contingency amount. The general
expectation is that a risk analysis will yield a schedule contingency in the range of 10% to 15%.
Development of schedule contingency should be viewed by the Planning Engineer as a process similar to
developing costs UAP.
The BP stage gate assurance process requires a Cost and Schedule Verification Review (CSVR) to be conducted
prior to entering a Define and Execute Stage Gate. The CSVR provides assurance that the cost and schedule
being presented for the project are well founded and that the key cost and schedule risks are identified and
included in the modeling of the risk analysis. This section focuses on the Schedule Risk Analysis only.
Schedule Risk Analysis uses a Monte Carlo simulation by modeling schedule risks and uncertainties against the
project plan to determine schedule contingency. The risk models are used to assess schedule contingency levels
and establish the Performance Target (PT) and the Not to Exceed (NTE) dates in the project Financial
Memorandums (FMs).
The risk review outcomes expressed in PT and NTE dates are in no way meant to replace or substitute the Master
Control Schedule dates. Just as cost UAP is determined by risk analysis and held separately from the control
budget, the schedule risk probabilistic dates are only used to establish schedule ‘UAP’ or contingency unless the
risk review process uncovers a need for modifications to the control schedule. In this case, the control schedule is
modified, and the risk analysis is re-run to determine new contingency durations.
The schedule contingency resides at the end of the overall schedule between the MCS control target date and the
PT. Care must be shown that undue contingency is not modeled in the Master Control Schedule, although it is
required that most likely durations will include routine weather, Simops and other routine schedule disruptions.
Major risk events will reside in the risk analysis file.
Schedule risk models are developed from the project Master Control Schedule as the first input to the risk
analysis software, currently Primavera Risk Analysis. Activity risk ranges are assigned, risk events and weather
calendars are modeled, and a simulation is run to determine range of probabilistic dates for activity completion.
The quality of the output of the risk analysis is a function of the quality of the project schedule, the schedule risk
model, the risk inputs and team participation. Project schedules must have logic driven critical paths along with
realistic schedule float values for the schedule activities. The schedule risk model must incorporate these features
while following the guidelines as set forth in this document. The Project Team should have played a key part in
developing the schedule and own the schedule basis, assumptions, interfaces and risks. Lack of team
participation is often revealed during a risk review during team interviews.
The key factors for risk analysis are as follows:




A robust project schedule developed by the Project Team and supported by benchmarks and sound float and
interface management principles
A quality schedule risk model meeting the guidelines as laid out in this document
The quality and suitability of risk inputs, ranges and events
The interactive participation of the project and review teams in understanding the schedule and associated
risks
The Planning Engineer should understand that the risk analysis probabilistic dates are in no way intended to
imply that an MCS is not achievable as the MCS is built without assuming any major schedule disruptions that
cannot be predicted with confidence. The probabilistic dates generated by the risk analysis shall not replace the
MCS and Contractor control schedule finish dates. To be clear, the MCS will not be adjusted to reflect the PT
date as the completion date. The project will continue to work towards, progress and report against the master
control schedule dates and manage the Contractor with the contractor control schedules.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 68 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
In the instance in which a major schedule deviation occurs after the Define gate to the extent requiring rebaseline
of the MCS, it is required to refresh the risk analysis and revisit the FM promise dates.
Please see document Cost and Schedule Verification Review Requirements (GPO-PC-PRO-00013) for a highlevel review of the Cost and Schedule Review process.
It is mandatory that a pre-read be provided to the review team no later than 1 week prior to the review and is
required that the pre-read be “signed off” by the regional planning leadership before being placed in a shared
directory for review team access. The pre-read consist of the following:
Basis of Design (for Define gate review only)
Risk Register
Level 1 Schedule
Schedule Basis and Assumptions Document
Master Control Schedule
Risk Model
Contractor Level 3 schedules (when available)
Specific review requirements are addressed in Appendix J Risk Analysis.
8.2
IPA External Benchmarking
IPA, Independent Project Analysis is contracted with BP to provide external benchmarking analysis against
industry standards of our Cost and Schedule at each stage gate along with a Close Out Report on completion of
the project. IPA reviews are required for Category A Projects or other projects as deemed strategically important
to BP. The initial IPA review is the Pacesetter Review and generally takes place around the time of the Cost and
Schedule Verification Review during the Concept Definition Stage. Experience has shown that holding the IPA
review after the cost and schedule review can lead to a more positive IPA score as the cost and schedule review
outputs can be provided to IPA.
The second IPA review is the “Prospective,” and occurs towards the end of Define and is also known as “PreSanction.” The Prospective review measures project maturity against plan and serves as a “mid-point” check in
between the Pacesetter and Close Out review. The IPA Close Out review takes place on completion of the
project.
The PSM is responsible for organizing the IPA reviews and will assign an individual to coordinate the collection
of data ahead of the review. Planning deliverables to IPA include completion of IPA provided advance tabulation
sheets of various project milestones, planned and forecasts stage gates and durations of key summary activities.
The IPA input documents are returned to IPA along with a pdf of the Master Control Schedule and a copy of the
Schedule Basis and Assumptions Document as previously submitted for the Cost and Schedule Verification
Review. If the CSVR is conducted prior to the IPA review, these outputs may also be provided to IPA at the
discretion of the project management
During the actual IPA review, the project planning team should be prepared to explain in detail the BP processes
used to underpin the Master Control Schedule and demonstrate the level of development of current contractor
schedules. During the Pacesetter review, taking place in Select, the Schedule Basis and Assumptions,
Benchmarking, Schedule WBS, Previous IPA reports, market conditions, contracting strategy and any other
information used to inform Master Schedule Development should be made available to show IPA the level of
rigor put into the schedule development. Note some of the documents may be of a sensitive nature and only
shown to IPA to lend credence to the schedule.
One of IPA key criteria in assessing a schedule is resource loading. Resource loading is a requirement of
Contractor schedules. An issue that may arise during the Pacesetter review is the lack of Contractor resource
loaded schedules. The timing of the Pacesetter review, occurring during Concept Definition in the Select Stage
is well ahead of any time that a project would be funded (at the Define FM), organize call offs or award contracts
to Contractors thereby setting the timing requirements of Contractor delivery of resource loaded schedules to BP.
This should be carefully explained to IPA if required including any forward planning to update the MCS based
on Contractor schedules. In the absence of a resource loaded FEED schedule, the MCS shall reflect a sufficient
level of FEED deliverables indicating the project team has a clear understanding of the critical and near critical
path of the FEED process.
IPA has an expectation that any schedule being presented to them in a review will have full team buy in and have
been carefully thought through.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 69 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
IPA Close Out reports for completed projects are good sources of industry data and also helpful in underpinning
a schedule that IPA will be reviewing. Be sure to cite the source of any IPA data used in benchmarking a
project.
The planning output of the Pacesetter Review compares the Define and Execute durations to industry norms for
similar projects.
Before the Execute Stage Gate, IPA will conduct a Prospective Review. IPA will expect the Master Control
Schedule to be fully underpinned by Contractor resource loaded schedules and awarded contracts. In the case
that not all Execute stage contracts are awarded, the project team must be able to indicate to IPA what the
schedule expectations and requirements are on these contracts and how this will be used to inform the MCS on
contracts award. Again, benchmarking and historical data, particularly Contractor specific is very helpful at this
stage. Performance against plan to date is also a good indicator of future success. If IPA notes substantial
deviations between the Pacesetter and Prospective Reports, the project should be in a position to explain how this
has been addressed towards improving the likelihood of future success.
IPA is sometimes called for interim check-ins at certain times during Execute. On project completion, IPA
returns to collect the actual cost and schedule the metrics which were generated in the Pacesetter and prepare a
Project Close Out Report comparing, in essence plan vs. actual data.
BP Benchmarking Website includes IPA reports. Many of these reports include valuable benchmarking
information, including industry benchmarks which can be very useful when developing the MCS and the
Schedule Basis and Assumptions.
IPA Report viewing requires permissions and a confidentially agreement obtained through BP Benchmarking
Function. Once granted permission, the reports are stored and viewable at the Benchmarking Website accessible
via the GPO Benchmarking Website and the Planning CoP site.
An IPA list of schedule expectations is included Appendix K.
8.3
Project Services Discipline Review
The Project Services Discipline Review (PSDR) is a multi-function review of the Project Services team assigned
to a project. The PSM and project Planning Engineers assigned to the project should be prepared to provide the
assurance that the PSDR checklist items are complete and/or in place at the time of the review or have a prepared
action plan as to when these actions will be in place.
The PSDR will take place as part of the Define and Execute Stage Gate transitional reviews and will be checked
every 6 months as part of the 6 Monthly Bottoms-Up Review.
Project planning engineers are required to have conducted a preliminary review of the planning check sheet with
their respective PSMs and PSTLs ahead of the formal PSDR.
This check list and other requirements can be found in the Project Services Discipline Review Requirements
(GPO-PC-PRO-00017) available at the CoP Website and the GPO library.
8.4
Primavera Risk Analysis Schedule Check
Primavera Risk Analysis includes a functional tool called ‘Schedule Check’. This tool shall be applied to all
Contractor and BP support schedules as a quick check on the integrity in the absence of Acumen Fuse. Schedule
Check provides a very quick view of technical schedule issues which could prove problematic. Included in the
Schedule Check are activity counts for:









Number of constraints (should be minimal)
Open ended tasks
Out-of-sequence updates (broken logic)
Lags longer than 0 days
Negative lags
Positive lags on Finish-to-Start links
Start-to-Finish links (reverse logic)
Lags between tasks with different calendars
Links to and from summary task (poor practice)
The Planning Engineer shall share the report with the owner of the schedule for correction of any technical
shortcomings. The Schedule Check goes on to list each Activity ID and allows the scheduler to go back to the
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 70 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
file, easily find the tasks and make any necessary corrections. Deeper integrity interrogations are available with
Acumen Fuse.
8.5
Acumen Fuse Schedule Review
In an ideal world, Contractor schedulers create robust schedules, following all of the basic schedule integrity
rules and best practices and immediately report variances to a Project Team and the Client.
In reality, Contractor scheduling abilities range from expert to novice, and Contractor reporting relationships
vary from robust and forthright to closeted and conditioned.
BP will be applying Fuse analysis on a periodic basis to understand the integrity of a schedule, to feedback
shortcomings to the schedule provider and to analyse schedule variances over time; what has changed since the
last issue of the schedule.
At least on a monthly basis, Contractor schedules shall be analysed using the integrity check feature of Acumen
Fuse. The integrity check serves two purposes; the first relates to establishing the general health of the schedule
construct, logic, durations, relationships and the second relates to revealing potential schedule manipulations or
changes since the last review that are not consistent with tracking against a baseline.
A common example is when a Contractor shortens the duration of a later activity to compensate for an overrun of
a current activity. Not only will Fuse identify the overrun, but it will also show you where the Contractor has
shortened subsequent durations to artificially maintain a finish date. This is not permitted unless the Contractor
has BP concurrence of a recovery plan.
Schedule integrity checks are captured as metrics in the Fuse analysis.
The second function of Fuse is schedule variance. Fuse has the capability to not only inform the project of key
interface date changes, but of any other variance within the schedule that may influence schedule outcome and
has occurred over the past reporting period. Planning Engineers are able to view schedule date changes at the
WBS level. When a Planning Engineer recognizes a date change that may impact the critical path, the Planning
Engineer is able to drill down in Fuse to find the source of the slippage. Any variances on the critical or nearcritical path or otherwise threatening the schedule will need to be raised with Project Management and
interrogated with the Contractor providing the schedule.
Appendix L provides further guidance on Fuse metrics and usage.
8.6
Six Monthly Bottoms-Up Review
Every 6 months the Global Define/Execute PSM along with the global planning and cost functional teams will
conduct a bottom-up schedule review to ensure accurate schedule and progress forecasting and reporting. Current
schedule work to-go will be validated against schedule forecasts. Risks will be updated to ascertain if any risks
have dropped off or any new risks have been identified. The review will include a ‘deep dive’ of the Contractor
reported progress and BP Planning Team summary progress reports.
The planning deliverables required to support the 6 monthly reviews will include an up to date Master Control
Schedule, the current risk register, an updated schedule risk model showing only work to go and following the
risk model rules as described in this document. Current Contractor control schedules used to inform the MCS
shall also be made available. If a project schedule is perceived to be at risk, a schedule risk analysis will be
conducted to check the validity of the PT and NTE dates.
Acumen Fuse will also play a key part in the 6 months bottom-up forecast. The 6 monthly bottom-up will be
comparing the changes to schedules that have occurred over a 6 month time period and will serve to pick up
additive changes to the schedule that may not have seemed significant at the time of the project internal monthly
Fuse analysis.
The project Planning Team participate fully in the Six Monthly Bottoms-Up Review and will be included on the
review outputs and will implement any recommended changes coming out of the review.
Reference Document GPO-PC-PRO-0027 Six Monthly Forecast Review Procedure for more information.
9
Project Change – MOC
Each project is charged with applying the BP Management of Change (MOC) process for control of project
changes. Projects will define a project specific PMOC (Project Management of Change), which fulfills the
requirements of BP MOC including a list of dates requiring PMOC application. If any project management
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 71 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
process identifies a change to the critical path or one of the key major project milestones as identified requiring
PMOC it will be documented, reviewed and approved via the PMOC process.
A list of mandatory and suggested PMOC key milestones follows:
Mandatory:
 Select / Define gate
 Define / Execute gate
 First production
 Project Completion
Suggested:
 Critical governmental permits that could impact critical path
 Commencing development drilling
 Start fabrication/construction
 Sailaway
 Start of each offshore installation campaign (hulls, subsea flowlines, topsides, etc.)
 Start and Finish of Export pipeline tie-ins
Any milestones identified which require an MOC will be considered as mandatory milestones for the schedule
should they not already appear on the mandatory milestone list.
Additional MOC information is available at the eMOC Website and document GPO Management of Change
Process GPO-PC-PRO-0009.
10
Project Close Out
Under direction of the PSM, Planning Engineers are responsible for developing a detailed schedule for all key
Close Out activities and tracking progress against the schedule. Timing for the production of a Close Out report
must be established early in the Execute stage. Early preparation allows for the project to develop a standard
format and set target dates for completion of each section of the report.
Preparation of the Project Close Out will not be dependent on total project completion. The preparation of the
Close Out documentation will begin on completion of each Phase of each Delivery Area of the project from the
close out of FEED engineering onward.
Project Services Managers will need to be cognizant of personnel demob plans to be sure to capture their
contributions to the Close Out prior to departing the project.
The Planning Engineer should be prepared to participate in the IPA Close Out and eProjects update. Planning
Engineers will be required to populate key schedule dates in the eProjects close-out tables. Schedule dates are
included in the Mandatory Milestones of the Master Control Schedule.
The Planning Engineer will also be tasked with providing the following information to the Close Out Report
document GPO-PC-PRO-00029. All information will be captured and organized by Delivery Area. The Planning
Engineer will be required to begin collecting this data as it becomes available during Define and Execute. It is
vital that the Planning Engineer does not wait until first production to begin collecting this information. All data
is to be accumulated in electronic format.
Data requirements:











As-built Master Control Schedule
As-built Level 1 project schedule
As-built BP support schedules
Final milestone table
Contractor baseline and as-built schedules
Contractor manpower plans and actuals
Details and analysis of schedule and progress
Any schedule studies completed over the course of the project including forensics
Detailed manhour reports where available (EPMS FEED and Detailed Engineering, Fabrication sites,
TAR/Brownfield, hook up, commissioning, etc.)
Procurement- as-built procurement and expediting tracking sheets
List of basic quantities/metrics; equipment count, cubic meters concrete, tons of steel, tons of pipe, meters of
cable, etc. with achieved rates of installation in graphical form.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 72 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure

Planning lessons captured (planning issues coming out of the lessons captured workshop).
A detailed register will be prepared by the Planning Engineer with the file name ‘Project XX Planning Close
Out’ and list each document/file included as part of the close out. The register should be prepared in advance and
used as a checklist as the information is collected.
The MCS and all other as-built schedule files will be collected in native format and pdf.
All planning contributions to the Close Out Report are to be delivered as directed by the PSM to the location
designated by Project Information Management (PIM).
Data collection templates shall be developed by Global Project Services and issued as a supplement to this
procedure, posted at the GPO library and linked to at the Planning CoP during the year following issue of this
procedure. The community will be informed of availability of these documents through the CoP.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 73 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix A Roles and Responsibilities
Planning Engineer Roles and Responsibilities
It is the responsibility of the Lead Planning Engineer to:





























Execute this Planning and Schedule Procedure and Project Coordination Procedures.
Establish planning awareness and ‘culture of planning.’ Provide planning tools and reports to Project
Management to facilitate decision making processes. Keep Project Management and relevant BP
Stakeholders informed of major schedule issues that have potential to impact schedule. Proactively
work major schedule issues with other team members.
Hold responsibility for contributing to the training, mentoring and coaching of those BP team Planning
Engineers within the Leads’ functional responsibility in the proper application of BP tools and ensuring
BP projects follow the tenets as laid out in this procedure.
Prepare and issue project Schedule WBS within the parameters as defined in this document.
Develop initial, top-down, Level 1 schedule. Work with delivery area Planning Engineers to fully
develop the Level 1 schedule as the initial Level 2 and 3 schedules are becoming available.
Lead effort in developing Schedule Basis and Assumptions document including collection of
benchmarking information from the BP Benchmarking team.
Participate in development of the Project Execute Plan and any project-specific Project Services plans.
Participate in the Management of Change (MOC) process where schedule is involved or may be
impacted.
Work with risk champion to ensure the risk management processes and risk content is included in
development of project schedules.
Support interface management for integrating scopes and stakeholders external to BP.
Chair schedule workshops and reviews.
Develop and maintain the Master Control Schedule with the support of the delivery area or other
Planning Engineers assigned to the project.
Manage the schedule baselining process.
Interface with PSCM and the Project Services Manager to insure planning, progress and reporting
requirements are included in major contract Project Coordination Procedures.
Provide guidance in reporting requirements for Contractors. Verify Contractors are meeting contractual
requirements for planning, scheduling, progress measurement and reporting. Validate Contractor
reported progress.
Hold primary responsibility for schedule forensics and claims analysis regarding schedule issues.
Work closely with the project Lead Cost Engineer to ensure costs phasing and forecasting aligns with
the current control schedule.
Develop resources. Provide training in use of planning software and common practices.
Develop and maintain overall schedule float management including schedule contingency and
allowance management.
Lead role in the application of internal overall progress measurement systems as defined in this
procedure.
Oversee development of project key milestones and interface milestones.
Work with delivery area Planning Engineers, PSCM and Contractors, supporting clear understanding of
Contractual or payment milestone definitions and validating that these milestones have been achieved
when claimed.
Work with Activity Planning team to ensure key interfaces with Operations are adequately represented
in the Operations integrated schedule.
Work with delivery area and other BP Planning Engineers. Identify all BP, Contractor, and third party
interfaces for inclusion in the Master Control Schedule at the appropriate level.
Act as the primary interface with the Global Operations Group (GOO) functional planning group.
Interface with the Operations Organization and Global Wells Organization (GWO) to ensure the Master
Control Schedule reflects summary of GOO and GWO tasks as appropriate.
Support the Planning Engineer in oversight of the development of Contractor schedules.
Support planning effort in development of the Long Term Plan (LTP) and the Global Financial Outlook
(GFO). Support business planning efforts as required by the regional Finance Teams.
Oversee schedule staffing resources. Look ahead to ensure sufficient manpower is available to meet
scheduling and reporting requirements.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 74 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure





Lead the preparation for Schedule Risk Analysis assurance process. Participate with delivery area
Planning Engineers in development of Schedule Risk Model schedule. Participate throughout the risk
review process.
Develop ad hoc schedules and reporting as required by management.
Ensure project learnings relative to this procedure are documented through the shared learning system
Develop project close out schedule and coordinate or provide input to eProjects, IPA close out, lessons
captured and close out data book. Track close out progress.
Conduct regular hands on site visits as required to verify schedule and progress reporting.
It is the responsibility of the Planning Engineer to:






















Execute this Planning and Schedule Procedure and Project Coordination Procedures.
Assist in development of Level 1 schedule and the Schedule Basis and Assumptions document.
Support development and maintenance of their delivery area section of Master Control Schedule,
including updating and reporting of variances.
Work closely with the project delivery area Cost Engineer to ensure costs phasing and forecasting aligns
with the current control schedule.
Support interface management for integrating scopes and stakeholders external to BP.
Ensure that Contractor plans contain activities, durations, logic and timings that reflect industry
standard methods for the scope of work.
Oversee Contractor schedule, progress measurement and reporting, ensuring implementation of
Contractors’ contractual requirements (review, comment and approve Schedule Development and
Control Plans, schedules, outputs, reporting).
Analyze progress performance and correlate progress indicators with other project controls indicators
(schedule, quantity installation, workforce, and productivity). Trend performance indicators to assist
with the development of ‘non-biased’ owner’s perspective of progress measurement.
Analyze the Contractor resource, progress, and productivity measures against the schedule to address
reporting accuracy in all areas.
Facilitate and monitor the tracking and forecasting of interfaces between Contractors.
Audit Contractors’ progress management system.
Develop and maintain integrated, logic-linked schedules for assigned Delivery Team(s) that shall be
used to inform the Master Control Schedule (MCS).
Provide the necessary ad hoc schedules to ensure the development of proper estimates and studies
within a project stage.
Implement, analyze and trend schedules within each project stage and for entire project until completion
/ close out.
Assist with preparation of Schedule Risk Analysis.
Provide schedule input to and implement schedule element of the change management procedure.
Participate in development and implementation of progress measurement and reporting system,
including WBS roll-up levels, weightings and reporting.
Prepare and present project information to appropriate stakeholders.
Interface with the Operations Organization and Global Wells Organization to ensure schedule interfaces
are identified in relevant schedules, underpinning the Master Control Schedule.
Act as primary interface with Operations Organization Activity Planning group at the detailed-planning
level for Brownfield or interface scope.
Attend coordination meetings, both within the Project Team and with Contractors.
Provide input into eProjects, IPA close out, lessons capture and Project Close Out process.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 75 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Specific Prohibited Activities for the Planning Engineers
The Planning Engineers are not to be involved in the following activities:








Integrate Contractors’ detailed schedules into a large structure by electronically or manually merging
different schedules with the intent of creating an electronic Master Control Schedule. The MCS shall be
developed as further defined in this document.
Duplicate/replicate any activities across any two or more schedules with the exception of creating interface
milestones or summarizing data for use in the MCS.
Create detailed level 3 schedules in lieu of contractor schedules when contractor schedules are not available.
The level 2 MCS will suffice until such time contractor detail schedules are in place.
Divulge BP confidential schedule information, such as schedule float, contingency, Performance Target and
Not to Exceed dates.
Directly share pdf or native schedules between the engineering, procurement, construction, fabrication,
installation, or hook up contractors. Schedule interfaces are to be conditioned and managed on a controlled
basis within the MCS. This is an integral element in the management and preservation of schedule float.
Share any Contractor schedule float information with an interdependent or any other Contractor outside of
the BP. This means that any schedule float determined through development of the integrated Master
Control Schedule is confidential information. Individual Contractors executing a part of the project are
not to be informed of how much float they may have as measured against the total project. Share any native
schedule file with any external organization without the explicit consent of the Project Services Manager
(e.g. IPA, Partners, etc.).
Develop any processes or procedures that are contrary to this procedure without explicit approval of the
regional and global planning functional organizations.
Create schedules or progress systems and processes for Contractors. Contractors engaged to do work on
behalf of BP are fully responsible for scheduling and measuring/reporting progress for their scopes of work
as per the contract requirements. BP Planning Engineers are expected to be fully engaged with Contractors
in helping them to understand BP requirements.
Note: EPC and EPCI Contractors will be expected to manage their own internal interfaces under the influence of
BP planning but not strictly under direct control of BP depending the contract strategy (reimbursable vs. lump
sum).
An exception to the prohibition of duplication of activities is the provision of detailed Brownfield schedules to
Regional Operations schedules managed by the Activity Planning team.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 76 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix B Planning Deliverables by CVP Stage
Project Appraise Stage
AGM Planning Engineer deliverables during Project Appraise will include:











The Project Appraisal Schedule with Level 1 and 2 activities, including overall timelines anticipated for
Project Appraise, early and late Select and taking into account assurance and governance processes; it will
be necessary to clearly identify:
o Key decisions
o Dependencies/logic on all contributing disciplines to make key decisions
o Establish ownership/responsibility and support resources for all activities done by the Project
Team, Contractors, and/or Consultants
Project resource loading and collaboration requirements to aid project organization design
Potential iterative, rework loops between project activities and schedule risk mitigation strategies
Deliverables required by Project MPcp
Sufficient schedule analysis of the concept under review to support screening and to ensure that schedule
aspects are, where appropriate, reflected in determining the concepts to be shortlisted for evaluation in early
Select
The Schedule WBS in line with the requirements of this document
The summary Level 1 schedules, including project contingency through to project completion for all
development concepts
Benchmarking techniques to be applied to concept schedule development to demonstrate how the
development concepts compare with BP internal and industry analogues
Schedule Basis and Assumptions, risk and opportunities described for all options under consideration
First-pass Select stage schedule, including overall timelines anticipated for project concept selection,
concept definition, assurances and governance processes
*Contingency to be clearly identified on all options
*Contingency to be provided by the Global Project Services either through risk analysis or by comparison to
analogous projects actual over runs from Appraise/Select durations to actual out turn or forecast. Applying risk
analysis will be dependent on sufficient information being available to construct an effective risk model.
Select Stage
AGM Planning Engineer deliverables during early Select (Concept Selection) will include:






Sufficient schedule analysis of the shortlisted concepts to support the evaluation and to ensure that schedule
aspects are, where appropriate, reflected in the concept selection recommendation
Updated Project Appraisal Schedule, adding detail as appropriate for Concept Evaluation and Concept
Definition and clearly identifying or refining:
 Key decisions to be refined, as required
 Dependencies on all contributing disciplines to make key decisions to be refined, as required
 Ownership/responsibility and support resources for all activities done by Project Team, Contractors,
and/or Consultants to be refined, as required
 Project Appraisal project resource and collaboration requirements to be refined to aid project
organization design, as required
 Potential iterative, rework loops between project activities and schedule risk mitigation strategies to be
re-assessed, as required
 Deliverables required by Project MPcp to be identified, if not already identified
Updated Schedule WBS in line with the requirements of this document (if required)
Development of schedule options/studies
Schedules to include Level 1 and Level 2 activities of each concept under review
 Most scheduling efforts prior to Concept Selection may involve running scenarios, what-ifs, etc. as
different concepts are being evaluated. These schedule activities should be carried out outside of the
Select stage schedule file.
 Development of initial Level 1 schedule for the selected concept for handover to the project Planning
Team
Inclusion of decision and review processes leading to Concept Selection, including development of the
Decision Memorandum (DM) in support of the Project Review Meeting (PRM)
AGM Planning Engineer deliverables during late Select (Concept Definition) will include:
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 77 of 134
© BP p.l.c.
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure

Updated Project Appraisal Schedule, adding detail as appropriate for Concept Definition and Concept
Definition and clearly identifying or refining:
 Dependencies on all contributing disciplines to make key decisions to be refined, as required
 Ownership/responsibility and support resources for all activities done by Project Team, Contractors,
and/or Consultants to be refined, as required
 Project Appraisal project resource loading and collaboration requirements to be refined to aid project
organization design, as required
 Potential iterative, rework loops between project activities and schedule risk mitigation strategies to be
re-assessed, as required
 Deliverables required by Project MPcp to be identified, if not already identified
PGM Planning Engineer deliverables during this stage will include:













Integrated Concept Definition schedule, clearly indicating activities leading up to and through the Stage
Gate Review process and subsequent Define gate
Supporting project management and team key deliverables required for the Select to Define Stage Gate
Reviews (SOR, preliminary BOD, PEP, Management Plans, etc. as defined in MPcpV3)
Develop the Stage Gate Assurance schedule.
Planning Contractor development of CTRs, agreed FEED deliverables, budgets, etc.
If engaged, supporting Contractor development of Level 3, resource loaded FEED schedule and any
subsequent Level 2 Execute schedule when applicable and enforcing coordination procedures
Supporting development of procurement and contracting strategies to be implemented in Define
Contractor and BP development of early procurement plan for long leads to be ordered during Define or in
extreme cases Concept Definition when specifically approved.
Development of detailed Define Stage Gate Review schedule, including assembly and delivery of all prereads
Identification and agreement with Project Team of all Define and Execute stage major and intermediate
milestones, including interface milestones
Input to and development of the Class 3 Cost Estimate required as input for the economic evaluations prior
to compilation of the Select to Define DSP and FM.
Development of Define stage progress measurement processes and procedures; validation of Contractors’
processes
Standard contributions to monthly reports as defined in this document and project specific requirements
Schedule review and governance cycle as required per project:
 Subsurface discipline review, RAM, RUSM (if required)
 GWO Peer Review (if required)
 Discipline reviews, including PSDR, EDR/PHSSER
 Cost and Schedule Verification Review
 IPA Pacesetter Review
 Integrated Stage Gate Review, ISGR
 Project Review Meeting, UEM, RPM and RCM
Define Stage
Planning Engineer key planning deliverables will include:











Monitoring of Contractor schedules, schedule integrity checks, variance analysis, schedule analysis and
forecasting
Validating FEED progress, roll up of overall FEED progress
Validating early Execute activities progress; validating Contractor planning and progress systems
Working with Delivery Area Project Managers and engineering, identifying long leads and setting long lead
equipment Required On Site (ROS) dates
Overseeing Contractor development of Execute stage processes and procedures
Further development of Execute stage major and intermediate milestones, including interface milestones
Overseeing Contractors development of Level 3, resource loaded Execute schedules
Monitoring and enforcing Contractors implementation of contract coordination procedures
Participating in development of contracting strategies
Reviewing and commenting on Execute Contractor proposal schedules
Maintenance and updating of MCS, adding detail as appropriate for the Execute schedule and issuing on a
monthly basis
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 78 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure




Monthly report deliverables, including progress tables, curves, manpower histograms, productivity analysis,
and variance analysis
Updating the Execute Stage Gate Review section of the schedule, ensuring pre-read requirement dates are
communicated to the teams
Updating aggregate progress curves with Execute stage curves as provided by Contractors
Validation of original progress plan against Execute stage schedule updates to ascertain if a rebaseline of the
control schedule is required. If determined to be necessary, the rebaseline is to occur prior to the Execute
Stage Gate assurance processes.
Execute Stage
Planning Engineer key planning deliverables will include:








Monitoring of Contractor schedules, schedule integrity checks, variance analysis, schedule analysis and
forecasting
Reviewing and commenting on any additional Execute proposal schedules
Maintenance and updating of MCS, adding detail as appropriate and issuing on a monthly basis
Monitoring and enforcing Contractors implementation of contract coordination procedures
Working with installation, hook up and commissioning teams to further develop detailed schedules
Detailed development of turnaround schedules, coordinating interface of Activity Planning and project
schedules and consolidated manpower requirements
Development of support schedules for BP self-executed scope
Preparing close out schedule and planning contributions
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 79 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix C Work Breakdown Structure
WBS Sample Diagram
The BP Standard WBS includes a diagram depiction of a project by each Type of Project and Physical
Breakdown Structure. A similar format has been used to consolidate a Schedule WBS using an FPSO project as
an example representing all of the Physical Breakdown Structure/Delivery Area of the project as depicted in the
Standard WBS.
The following two graphics depict a Define and Execute Schedule WBS. Please note there may be variations to
this where additional elements are added at Level 3. The graphics have omitted Milestones and General for
clarity. All Master Control Schedules and BP support schedules will include a Milestone WBS at level 1 at the
beginning of the schedule. The milestone WBS will include all major milestones that span Define/Execute and
are further defined in the MCS section of this document.
General WBS at level one are only to be used as required for activities that are neither specific to Define or
Execute.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 80 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Define
Substructure
(Hull)
Owners
Project
Management
Engineering
Facilities
Engineering
PSCM
Project
Services
HSSE
Subsurface
Operations
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Anchor System
(Piles/Moorings)
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Note: Define Stage Engineering is normally
called FEED, Front End Engineering Design, also
referred to as “FEL3” by IPA and is composed of
those engineering activities required to “Define”
the project
Page 81 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Subsea
Export
Topsides
Engineering
GSH
Engineering
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Execute
Owners
Substructure
(Hull)
Anchor System
(Piles/Moorings)
Topsides
Export
Subsea
Transportation
& Installation
Hook-Up &
Commissioning
Project
Management
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Substructure
Substructure
Facilities
Engineering
Procurement
Procurement
Procurement
Procurement
Procurement
Anchor
System
Anchor
System
PSCM
Fabrication
Fabrication
EPC Turret
Fabrication
GSH Supply
Topsides
Topsides
Fabrication
Export
Export
Subsea
Subsea
Project
Services
Fabrication
HSSE
Subsurface
Operations
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 82 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix D Level 1 Schedule Specification
Level 1 schedules may be prepared in Milestone Pro or Excel, depending users preference, but will meet the
specification as laid out in this procedure including content and format.
Level 1 schedules are mandatory for overall project schedule reporting. Complex Delivery Areas may require a
Level 1 schedule as a subset to the overall Schedule but care must be shown that all dates remain in alignment
with the MCS during Define/Execute.
Format of the Level 1 schedule is as per the following example:
Project
Logo
Sample Project (Spar)
Status Date: 31-Mar-12
Level 1 Schedule
1
Project Stage
2011
2
3
SELECT
M ajor M ilestones
4
1
2012
2
3
Order 1st
Long Leads
Topsides
Define / FEED Engineering
Topsides Procurement - 1st PO to Last Onsite
Quarters Procurement - Issue RFQ to Ready to Ship
Execute/Detailed Engineering
Fabrication
Onshore Precommissioning
Load Out and Tie Dow n to Sailaw ay
Hull and M ooring
FEED/Define Engineering
Execute/Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Fabrication
Load Out, Transport and Prep at [Location]
Subsea
FEED/Define Engineering
Execute/Detailed Engineering
Subsea Equipment Procurement and Fabrication
GSH Procurement and Fabrication (to 1st Oil/WI)
Export Pipeline
Engineering
Procurement and Fabrication
Installation, Hook Up and Com m issioning
Pipeline Installation and-Tie Ins
Production Flow line Installation
Hull Installation, Hook Up and Commissioning
Topsides and Subsea Hook Up and Commissioning
Start Up
Drilling and Com pletions
M ODU 1 Drill and Complete 1st 6 Production Wells
M ODU 2 Drill and Complete 1st 3 Water Injection Wells
M ajor M ilestones
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Intermediate
Activity Bar
4
1
2013
2
3
4
1
2014
2
3
DEFINE
4
2015
2
3
1
4
2016
2
3
1
4
EXECUTE
H&M Cut
Steel
2017
2
3
OPERATE
Hull
Sailaw ay
TS Cut
Steel
1
TS
Sailaw ay
First
Oil
Start Up
Water
Inj.
Hull
Sailaw ay
Mobilize
Pipelay
Vessel
Hull Suction Pile
Installation
Mobilize
HLV
Production
Water Inj.
Progress Bar
Critical Path
Page 83 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Orighinal Plan
Installation
Weather Window
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix E Mandatory Milestones
The following milestones shall be captured in each schedule as applicable. Where milestones are repeated by
delivery area, a dash 1, dash 2 etc. will be added to the ID. For example, cut steel for topsides would be
ProjID00510 whereas cut steel for a hull on the same project would be ProjID00510-1.
Milestone
Activity ID
Description
Select FM Financial Memorandum
ProjID00100
SOR Issued
Decision Memorandum on Concept
Select
ProjID00105
ProjID00110
Preliminary PEP Issued
Select Stage Engineering
Discipline Review
ProjID00115
ProjID00120
Select Stage Cost and Schedule
Verification Review
ProjID00130
Select Stage Project Services
Discipline Review
Select Stage IPA Review
ProjID00131
Select Stage Integrated Stage Gate
Review
ProjID00150
Select Stage Project Review
Meeting
ProjID00160
Select Stage Subsurface Discipline
Review, RAM, RUSM
ProjID00170
Select Stage Operations Readiness
Plan Approved
ProjID00175
Select Stage Operations Staff Plan
Approved
Select Resource Planning Meeting
Select RCM Resource
Commitment Meeting : FM
Approval
Define FM
ProjID00176
Approval of this document allows the project to pass
into the Select CVP Stage.
Statement of Requirements Issued
Document approved during the Concept Selection
Integrated Stage Gate Review where the concept
selection recommendation is tested and confirmed.
Preliminary Project Execution Plan Issued
Verification review that tests and confirms
Engineering and HSSE readiness, MPcp
requirements are met, and inputs to Define FM.
Review project cost and schedule, assess schedule
contingency and cost UAP to determine PT and
NTE dates, as well as determine the project’s UAP
and AUAP used in the Define FM.
Verification review that tests and confirms Project
Services readiness and MPcp requirements are met.
3rd Party verification review that tests and confirms
Project Front End Loading and readiness to progress
into Define
Verification review with GPO VP of Project
Execution and GPO Function heads to confirm the
project’s readiness to progress from Select to
Define. Approval allows progression to Project
Review Meeting.
Verification review with GPO Senior VP to confirm
the project’s readiness to progress from Select to
Define. Approval allows progression to Upstream
Executive Meeting.
Verification review that tests and confirms
subsurface readiness, MPcp requirements are met,
and inputs to Define FM.
The high level plan to deliver the Operations
Readiness Plan for the project is in place and has
been approved by the PGM and Region VP
Developments
Operations Staffing Plan for the Project is in place
and approved by PGM and VP Ops
Formal approval of the resource progression
Formal approval of the Financial Memorandum by
the BP Board of Directors
Define Stage BOD Complete
ProjID00205
Define Stage Engineering
Discipline Review
ProjID00210
Define Stage Cost and Schedule
Verification Review
ProjID00211
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
ProjID00140
ProjID00180
ProjID00190
ProjID00200
Approval of this document allows the project to pass
into the Define CVP Stage. The Define FM sets
performance expectations for a project (PT and NTE
Dates),
FEED Basis of Design Complete and issued for
detailed design
Verification review that tests and confirms
Engineering and HSSE readiness, MPcp
requirements are met, and inputs to Execute FM.
Review project cost and schedule, assess schedule
contingency and cost UAP to determine PT and
NTE dates, as well as determine the project’s UAP
Page 84 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Define Stage Project Services
Discipline Review
ProjID00212
Define Stage Wells Discipline
Review
ProjID00220
and AUAP used in the Define FM.
Verification review that tests and confirms Project
Services readiness and MPcp requirements are met.
GWO Drilling and Completions PEER Review
Define Subsurface Discipline
Review, RAM, RUSM Updates
Define Stage Operations and
Maintenance Strategy Frozen
ProjID00230
Reservoir Development Assurance Review
ProjID00235
Define Stage Detailed Operations
Readiness Schedule in place
Define Stage IPA Review
ProjID00236
Define Stage Integrated Stage Gate
Review
ProjID00260
Define Stage PRM Project Review
Meeting
ProjID00270
Define RPM Meeting
Define RCM Resource Committee
Meeting : FM Approval
Mid Define Check In
Execute FM
ProjID00280
ProjID00290
6 Month Bottoms Up Review
ProjID00305
Permitting
ProjID00306
Start FEED Engineering (by
delivery package)
ProjID00310
FEED Engineering 95% Complete
(by delivery package)
ProjID00320
FEED Engineering 100%
Complete (by delivery package)
ProjID00340
Start Detailed Engineering (by
delivery package)
ProjID00350
Commence HAZOPS
ProjID00351
The Operations and Maintenance Strategy is Frozen
and requirements have been incorporated in the
design
Operations readiness plans are in place and key
milestones are reflected in the MCS
3rd Party verification reviews that tests and confirms
Project Front End Loading and readiness.
Verification review with GPO VP of Project
Execution and GPO Function heads to confirm the
project’s readiness to progress from Define to
Execute. Approval allows progression to Project
Review Meeting.
Verification review with GPO VPs and senior
leadership to confirm the project’s readiness to
progress from Define to Execute. Approval allows
progression to Resource Planning Meeting.
Formal approval of the resource progression
Formal approval of the Financial Memorandum by
the BP Board of Directors
Cost and Schedule mid-define check in
Approval of this document allows the project to pass
into the Execute CVP Stage. The Execute FM sets
performance expectations for a project (PT and NTE
Dates)
BP Internal review of cost and schedule forecast,
comparing with current with baseline/stage gate
review and any previous 6 monthly bottoms up
review. Subsequent 6 monthly reviews to be
numbered ProjID00305-1, 02, etc.
Permitting requirements vary from region to region
and must be identified as key milestones when they
have the potential to drive the project scope or
negatively impact the project scope going forward.
Planning Engineers will use 900 series numeric at
end of activity ID for various types of permit
requirements.
Start of FEED engineering by delivery package/L3
WBS Element. This is not the start of Define by
delivery package, but meant to track the “true” start
of FEED engineering.
The achievement of 95% FEED engineering
progress complete by delivery package/L3 WBS
Element. This level of completeness is important as
this represents the bulk of FEED engineering
complete.
The achievement of 100% FEED engineering
progress complete by delivery package/L3 WBS
Element
Start of detailed engineering by delivery package/L3
WBS Element. This is not the start of Execute by
delivery package, but meant to track the “true” start
of detailed engineering.
Start of HAZOPS during detailed engineering. If
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
ProjID00250
ProjID00291
ProjID00300
Page 85 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Complete HAZOPS
ProjID00352
Issue Bulk Steel MTO
ProjID00353
Issue 1st Primary Steel AFC
drawings
Issue Bulk Piping MTO
Issue First Isometrics
Detailed Engineering 95%
Complete (by delivery package)
ProjID00354
Detailed Engineering 100%
Complete (by delivery package)
ProjID00370
Place Purchase Order First Long
Lead
ProjID00380
Execute FM PHSSER Engineering
Discipline Review
ProjID00390
Receipt of Last Long Lead Onsite
ProjID00400
Order First Tree
ProjID00430
Receive First Tree
ProjID00440
Order first subsea manifold
ProjID00450
Receive first subsea manifold
Integrated subsea SIT Complete
ProjID00460
ProjID00470
Rig Audit
Rig Selection Complete
Mobilize Drilling Rig
ProjID00471
ProjID00472
ProjID00473
Demobilize Drilling Rig
ProjID00474
Mobilize to
Fabrication/Construction Site
Order First Structural Steel
ProjID00480
Receive First Structural Steel
ProjID00500
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
ProjID00355
ProjID00356
ProjID00360
ProjID00490
multiple HAZOPS are conducted and staged not to
be continuous, milestones will be included for each
one.
Completion of HAZOPS during detailed
engineering. If multiple HAZOPS are conducted
and staged not to be continuous, milestones will be
included for each one.
Issue of the first bulk primary and secondary steel
Material Take Off.
Issue of the first batch of AFC structural drawings
Issue of the first bulk piping Material Take Off.
Issue of the first batch of Piping Isometric drawings
The achievement of 95% detailed engineering
progress complete by delivery package/L3 WBS
Element. This level of completeness is important as
this represents the bulk of detailed engineering
complete.
Last AFC deliverable completed with the exception
of those place on hold to be completed substantially
later in the program
The issuance of the first long lead purchase order or
contract provided LLI, generally during the Define
Stage.
Verification review that tests and confirms
Engineering and HSSE readiness and MPcp
requirements are met. Conducted early in Execute
after detailed engineering is complete.
The receipt of the last long lead piece of equipment
at site.
GSH issuance of the work release for the first subsea
tree. Availability of first tree is critical to
Completions work.
GSH receipt at site of the first subsea tree.
Availability of first tree is critical to Completions
work for horizontal tree types.
GSH issuance of the WPR for the first subsea
manifold.
GSH receipt at site of the first subsea manifold.
Completion of the Systems Integration Testing for
subsea equipment. Required before start of subsea
equipment installation offshore.
Audit of Drilling Rig
Drilling rig(s) placed under contract
Placing drill rig on location. When multiple rigs are
engaged, a milestone will exist for each drilling rig
mob.
Drilling Rig departs location at end of contract.
When multiple rigs are engaged, a milestone will
exist for each drilling rig demob.
First BP or representative personnel to be located at
a site office
Represents first order of steel intended for a
fabrication facility, whether a major fab yard or rack
steel, for example, for an onshore facility. Generally
associated with a bulk MTO issue by an EPMS
contractor
Represents receipt of first order of steel at a
fabrication facility, whether a major fab yard or rack
steel, for example, for an onshore facility. Generally
Page 86 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Order First Piping Material
ProjID00505
Receive First Piping Material
ProjID00506
Cut Steel
ProjID00510
Construction PHSSER
ProjID00520
Major Lift Dates
ProjID00530
Keel Lay
ProjID00540
Float Out
ProjID00550
Maintenance Management System
Ready for SH1s
Mechanical Completion
ProjID00555
Start Commissioning
ProjID00570
Finish Commissioning
ProjID00580
Operating Procedures Available
ProjID00556
Operating Maintenance and
Management Team In Place
Maintenance and Management
System in Place Ready for Start Up
All Operating Procedures in Place
ProjID00557
All Required Engineering
Information Handed over to
Operations
ProjID00561
Ready for Sailaway
ProjID00590
Sailaway
ProjID00600
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
ProjID00560
ProjID00558
ProjID00559
associated with a bulk steel order
Order first piping fabrication material, generally part
of a bulk order
Receipt of bulk piping fabrication materials at
fabrication site.
Applies to fabrication of hulls and topsides and is a
major milestone, usually contractual and literally
reflects cutting first piece of steel in the fab yard for
the project
Project Health, Safety, Security and Environmental
review
Lift date of any major equipment item, deck
elevation, jacket sections, hull sections, towers,
compressors, etc. in a fabrication yard, offshore site
or onshore facility location
This is a shipyard activity which represents the first
vessel section (block) laid in the dry dock to begin
assembly of the hull components
This is a hull milestones representing when a hull is
in assembly in a dry dock and is assembled to a
sufficient degree to “float out” of the dry dock for
quayside completion. A project could also have
multiple float outs where hulls are partially
completed and floated for repositioning
Maximo/Backbone is populated and handed over
operations prior to the start of any commissioning
Defined as sign off of the last Systems Mechanical
Completion Certificate in a fabrication yard, onshore
facility or offshore installation, with respect to the
location (fab yard MC are only those planned to be
complete in the yard and not deferred by BP, for
example). THE PROJECT MUST AGREE THE
DEFINITION OF MECHANICAL COMPLETION
WITH EACH CONTRACT THAT HAS THIS
FEATURE AS PART OF THE CONTRACT
Begins when sufficient construction of systems is
complete, allowing static test to begin (typically
loop checks)
Completion of static and dynamic testing associated
with a project. Generally refers to a location or site
such as a fabrication yard or construction site. Does
not include commissioning planned or carryover to
offshore
Operations Procedures are fully complete and
handed over prior to facility commissioning and
ready for start up
Operating and maintenance personnel in place prior
to commissioning and start up.
Maximo/Backbone fully is fully populated and
ready for start up
All Operating Procedures are delivered including
required vendor data
All Required engineering data, drawings and other
information required to safely operate and maintain
the facility has been handed over to Operations by
Engineering
Offshore projects- hulls, topsides, jackets are ready
to depart the fabrication facility
When a hull, topsides or jacket actually departs from
a fabrication facility. This could be substantially
Page 87 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Commencement of Installation –
Hull
Completion of Installation – Hulls
ProjID00610
Commencement of Installation –
Topside
Completion of Installation –
Topsides
Start Hook Up and Commissioning
ProjID00630
Complete Hook Up and
Commissioning
Commencement of Installation –
Export Pipelines Offshore
ProjID00660
Completion of Installation – Export
Pipelines Onshore
ProjID00680
Completion of Installation – Export
Pipelines Offshore
ProjID00690
Completion of Installation of
Subsea Architecture
ProjID00700
Start Facility Pre Works
ProjID00710
Start Shutdown
ProjID00720
First Production
ProjID00730
Post Shutdown Scope Complete
ProjID00740
Shutdown/TAR Complete
ProjID00750
Start-Up Efficiency Review
ProjID00790
Approval to Proceed with Start Up
ProjID00795
Go/No Go for Readiness for
Introduction of Hydrocarbons
ProjID00796
First Production
ProjID00800
Project Completion
ProjID00810
Independent External Project
Close-Out Review
Early Operability Review
Project Close-Out / All FM Scope
Complete
ProjID00840
later than “ready for sailaway.”
Heavy Lift Vessel mobilization to site and begin
installation activities
Heavy lift vessel has completed its work scope and
is demobilizing
Heavy Lift Vessel mobilization to site and begin
installation activities
Heavy lift vessel has completed its work scope and
is demobilizing
Interconnections and commissioning of offshore
modules, topsides, FPSOs, FSOs, SPARS, Semi’s.
Begins after heavy lift assembling or mooring is
complete
Commissioning is complete to the degree required
for the facility to be able to start up
Offshore: Mobilization of pipelay vessel and
beginning pipelay. Onshore- mobilization to site
and beginning excavation, site work
All pipe is strung, welded, in the ditch or on
sleepers, and hydrotested. This does not include
final hook up and drying which may take place
much later
Offshore- all pipe is complete and laid on bottom
and hydrotested. This does not include final hook
up and drying which could happen much later
Completion of installation of subsea architecture
including all equipment other than trees and all
interconnecting flowlines except risers and
umbilicals
Start of Brownfield scope of work in an operating
facility, in preparation for a shutdown
This is the day the facility is taken out of service for
modifications and no longer sales or processes
hydrocarbons
Introduction of the first hydrocarbons (Oil or Gas)
back into or out of the facility. Subsequent start up
milestones to be tagged 00730-01, 02, etc.
Completion of the project scope as defined in the
Execute FM- used in Shutdown scenarios
Facility shutdown construction, precomm and
commissioning scope is complete and facility is
ready to start up
Start-Up Efficiency Review typically known as
SUER
Developments and Production Div. Leadership
approval for GPO handover of control of the facility
to the Operations Organization to conduct start up
Meeting of Regional VPs to approve readiness for
introducing hydrocarbons and delegating authority
to start up to OIM/OSM
Introduction of the first hydrocarbons (Oil or Gas)
into the facility for sales
Completion of the project scope as defined in the
Execute FM
Independent External Project Close-Out Review
ProjID00850
ProjID00860
Early Operability Review
Project Close-Out / All FM Scope Complete
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
ProjID00620
ProjID00640
ProjID00650
ProjID00670
Page 88 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 89 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix F Contractor Schedule Development
SDCP, Schedule Development and Control Plan
When required by contract, Contractors shall develop a Schedule Development and Control Plan, SDCP. The
SDCP shall include as a minimum the following information:















The planning and scheduling control organization and relationship to other project team members or
departments and the duties of specific individuals in the control organizations.
Detail of the methodology for establishing a baseline schedule within the requirements of this document.
Detail of the methodology for resource loading the schedule and generating progress curves in accordance
with the WBS and Work Package/Discipline requirements as identified in this document whereby progress
curves are developed at a lower level with the capability to roll up to a summary level.
Detail of the methodology the Contractor will use to develop a Manpower Plan consistent with the SDCP
which will result in a histogram updated weekly and monthly showing planned, actual and forecast
manpower.
Schedule change control procedures for approval covering changes in work scope, delays, or other potential
schedule impacts to the Baseline Schedule.
Detail on the Contractor’s process for conducting schedule status updates.
Details on how the Contractor will measure, verify and report quantity/deliverables based physical progress
of each major activity within Contractors Scope of Work.
Intended progress control, progress measurement and data reporting procedure(s) for those packages/parts of
packages which have been subcontracted in part or in whole.
Progress Measurement Rules of Credit for review and approval.
Plans for verification of progress measurement by the Contractor and Subcontractor.
Details of how the Contractor’s schedule and progress measurement system will be integrated to manage
and control the work.
The Contractor’s proposed process for conducting schedule risk analyses (e.g. Monte Carlo and other
techniques to identify both overall schedule risk and to identify those activities with greater potential to
appear on critical paths as work progresses).
Description how, in the event of both actual delays and/or scheduling errors, any corrective actions to
maintain schedule dates will be initiated, tracked and evaluated.
The proposed process for presenting and transmitting the baseline schedule for review and approval.
The Contractor will promptly implement any requested modifications to the SDCP and the proposed
information formats.
Contractor Lookahead Schedules
Often Contractors are asked to create a 90 Day Lookahead Schedule which is created by extracting activities
from the live project schedule using a sliding time window of 14 days before current data date and 76 days after
current data date. Contractors show all activities completed during the previous 14 days, in progress at the cut-off
date, and to be commenced within the next 76 days.
The data to be shown on the bar charts will be derived from the most up-to-date active network analysis at cutoff date. The 90 Day Lookahead Schedule shall become an integral part of the Monthly Progress Report. The bar
charts will show as a minimum:








Activity ID
Activity title
Duration in working days and remaining durations for activities in progress
Total and free float
Actual finish dates for activities completed in previous 2 weeks
Actual start dates and forecast finish dates and actual progress for activities in progress
Forecast start and finish dates for activities intended to be completed within the 76 days
Baseline target bars
4 Week Lookahead Schedules are extracted from the live project schedule and based on a sliding time window of
14 days before current data date and 28 days after current data date and show any activities which are completed
during the previous 14 days, in progress at the cut-off date, and to be commenced within the next 28 days. The
data to be shown on the bar chart will be derived from the most up-to-date active network analysis at cut-off
date. The 4 Week Lookahead will become an integral part of the Weekly Progress Report. The bar chart will
show as a minimum:
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 90 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure








Activity ID
Activity title
Duration in working days and remaining durations for activities in progress
Total and free float
Actual finish dates for activities completed in previous 2 weeks
Actual start dates and forecast finish dates and actual progress for activities in progress
Forecast start and finish dates for activities intended to be completed within the 76 days
Baseline target bars
Schedule Development
The following requirements will apply to the development of the Contractor project baseline and working
schedule:

















Activity IDs are to be unique to and will not be duplicated by Contractor or any Subcontractor controlled by
Contractor. (An exception being the baseline activities Activity IDs will remain unchanged with the baseline
being the source data for the live schedule.)
Activity names must have a unique descriptions clearly expressed as an action with distinct deliverables.
Activity titles must be specific enough to stand alone when no organization is applied to the schedule.
All dates will be written in dd-Mmm-yyyy format (e.g. 12-Mar-2010) to avoid regional confusion.
All durations will be in days except in cases where a Contractor has been requested to provide a detailed
hourly schedule (e.g. TAR).
Schedule Calendars will reflect Contractors and Subcontractors actual work/ holiday/ non-working corporate
event dates and base workhour practices.
Procured Item lead times will use a 7-day calendar for manufacturing and delivery durations with the
exception that any logistical restrictions on delivery should be reflected in the appropriate calendar on the
delivery activity. An example may be an ice window or when a project only receives major equipment and
materials on certain days.
Note: BP and Contractor Planning Engineers will also have to pay close attention to freight consolidation
issues which can create a ‘delay’ in the delivery of material and equipment.
Contractor will use the P6 WBS functionality for the organization of all schedule layouts to be provided to
BP. Activity coding for schedule layouts to be provided to BP are only permitted on BP requests.
Individual activities at lower levels will not use titles that duplicate those at higher levels.
References in activity names to equipment or facilities will be consistent where repeated.
New activities will not be created to include unfinished work in another activity which other activity is, for
example, then identified as being complete. In such cases, two new activities will be created and the
associated planned and earned hours will be allocated between them on the basis of status of work at the
time of creation. Where such new activities are created, they will summarize to the same activity as the
original activity from which they have been created
Where activity titles in the current live schedule are changed for purposes of clarity and not for the purpose
of subdivision of an activity, on approval, they will be changed in the baseline accordingly and a record of
all such changes maintained up to date in P6 Notes.
Where new activities are created as part of an existing activity, the original activity will not be changed in
the baseline until such time as a revised baseline is approved.
All new activities created from old activities must be readily traceable to the original older activities in the
baseline schedule and noted in P6 Notes.
Reasons for variances in durations impacting key end dates shall be noted in the Primavera Notes feature
Resource loading of the baseline schedule will be used to generate both the Progress Curves and Manpower
Histograms.
Progress curves will not be revised for minor variances or when budgets are adjusted as part of routine
baseline maintenance.
Contractor Schedules Considerations
Engineering
Although the Planning Engineer should focus on the entire engineering schedule and Contractor performance,
there are key disciplines that require particular attention as they are likely to be on critical or near-critical path or
have a direct bearing on external interfaces. The key disciplines that the Planning Engineer should focus on
during the engineering phase, as well as the critical aspects of work produced by these disciplines are described
below. The Planning Engineer must be familiar with start up and commissioning requirements and how they
will drive construction sequences and hence drive engineering priorities.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
Page 91 of 134
Rev: B01
© BP p.l.c.
BP Internal
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Mechanical Engineering
 Produces equipment specifications to support the procurement process. Of vital importance is the
specification of long lead equipment leading to RFQs and receipt of equipment vendor drawings. These
drawings are critical for completing the engineering efforts and often lead to discipline interface delays with
reference to foundations and nozzle locations and orientations, in particular, but also controls.
Process
 Performs hazard and operations review, also known as a HAZOP. The Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams
(P&IDs) cannot be completed until all HAZOP issues have been addressed. P&ID Approved for Design
drawings are a key schedule driver to detailed engineering. No detailed engineering requirements can be
fully understood until this is achieved.
 Systems engineering, materials, flow assurance, process safety, integrity management
 Recognize the impact of vendor data on P&ID issues
Civil/Structural
 Is responsible for the design of the major steel or foundations that will determine the start of
fabrication/construction. Site mobilization and start of work are key activities. Obviously, these activities
can impact the project negatively if they are not performed in a timely manner.
 Recognize the impact of plot plan development. Frozen or AFC plot plan issue will be needed to release
civil and structural drawings at AFC status.
Procurement
 Is critical for expediting the receipt of vendor drawings that are required to progress the 3D model and other
engineering disciplines. Many engineering discipline interfaces are captured in vendor data. Be aware that
ownership of vendor data expediting often “falls through the cracks” in contractor organizations.
 GSH subsea supply scope of supply will have to be carefully interfaced with pipeline and flowline
engineering and procurement and GWO interdependencies, e.g. delivery of subsea trees.
Piping Design
 Produces 3D CADD models. This discipline drives the release of isometric drawings for pipe fabrication.
Interfaces within the model are particularly important as without modeling interfaces, more clashes are
likely leading to more re-work. Vendor data and other disciplines can cause delay in issuing piping
isometrics and thereby delay fabrication. Piping issue of isometrics should also be considered relative to the
piping shop drawing and fabrication duration requirements required to meet the piping erection schedule,
which is generally tied back to steel rack erection along with equipment setting.
 P&ID issues are linked to 30% and 60% model reviews and vendor data will impact the 60% model review.
 Model reviews will impact AFC drawing issues in all disciplines and must be a key focus area of contractor
planning.
 Contractors will typically achieve an average of 250-300 isometrics per week issued AFC.
 Subsea design: valves and pipeline engineering
E&I
 Produces critical electrical and instrumentation design items include one-line diagrams, termination
drawings, and loop diagrams. These design deliverables are critical in the later stages of fabrication.
 Construction engineering, both onshore and offshore for installation/constructability.
Note that all drawings loaded in the progress measurement database are part of the engineering progress
measurement and not part of “follow on” engineering. Follow on engineering only consists of project support in
answering RFIs, Request for Information, problems solving, re-designs when required, as building of drawings,
etc.
The Planning Engineer should interrogate how the Engineering and Procurement Contractor reflects receipt of
vendor data in the engineering schedule and how this information is logic tied to discipline deliverables. Keep in
mind that vendor data, to some extent, will typically drive foundation details, piping nozzle locations and related
supports and hangers and controls interfaces. Late vendor data can lead to assumptions being made which may
lead to late changes in design.
Procurement
To develop a procurement plan, the Contractor/Planning Engineer should start from a Required On Site date that
is determined by the fabrication or construction schedule and sequence, then work backward through the
numerous steps of procurement with time allowances for each step. This plan should identify key critical
equipment, which is usually driven by constructability, for example, large equipment on the lower deck of a
topside is the first priority, followed by equipment for the upper decks, followed by smaller equipment that can
easily be positioned after the decks are stacked. If critical equipment arrives late at the fabrication yard or
construction site, the Planning Engineer should expect some schedule and progress deviation.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 92 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
In most if not all cases, BP will be asked to provide ROS dates to an EP Contractor to assist with developing
priorities. The realities are that the schedule will be driven by the longest lead time equipment, which is required
for integration in the plant or structure during construction/fabrication. Procurement Contractors should
determine an initial view on lead times and work with BP on setting priorities, maintaining the longest lead
equipment as the top priority. Ultimately, Procurement Contractors will be held accountable to manage vendors
to vendor promise dates irrespective of a downstream ROS date.
BP will be applying float management principles between Engineering/Procurement Contractors and any
different Contractor responsible for construction and fabrication. True ROS dates should not be conveyed to
Procurement Contractors just as vendor promise dates should not be conveyed to Construction or Fabrication
Contractors.
Maintaining a record of this BP managed float between the ROS date and the vendor promise dates is a core part
of the planning team’s role. This can be achieved via a simple spread sheet listing the tags and bulks and
recording the ROS date, the promise date and calculating the BP float. It is also important to record any changes
which may occur and trend any erosion of float should a promise date be slipping or any accelerated ROS date
agreed to.
This practice is not only important for the purposes of robust planning; it is also a powerful commercial
management tool which can afford the PM and commercial team early signals that a potential impact could occur
and allow them to take appropriate mitigating action. Additionally it allows the BP project team to be fully
aware of the information each contractor has and help prevent the accidental sharing of BP sensitive information.
Consideration should be given to provide a reasonable amount of float between the required at-site date and the
shipping date. This is a normal float management issue and typical industry practice. A good rule of thumb is to
add 8 weeks for equipment and 12 weeks for bulks to the duration of the longest lead times; those on or near the
critical path. Obviously, shorter lead times should be managed well off the critical path and will not require any
additional float.
Company free issue items/material to vendors (piping pup pieces to valve manufacturers for example) should
follow the same basic rules.
Vendor purchase order promise dates shall never be used directly for installation planning without first being
conditioned by the project to accommodate the risk of delivery.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 93 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Construction/Fabrication/Installation
Start dates for construction and fabrication are typically driven by having a sufficient backlog of engineering and
material to work efficiently on the disciplines that generally kick off the work. Determining when this should
take place is not always straight forward.
Construction site work typically starts with getting the infrastructure in place to support work in the field
including camps and/or offices, roads, site preparation, fencing, temporary power and utilities when required,
etc. The amount of work will increase with the level of remoteness of the location.
Determining when these activities should start is a function of design and material deliverables to support
efficient use of resources once the project mobilizes. One of the key determining factors for scheduling start of
infrastructure work is understanding equipment deliveries (when is a foundation required), steel rack deliveries
(when are piperack foundations required) and then working backwards from here to determine when site
mobilization needs to occur to support installation of additional infrastructure and site prep leading up to the
roads and foundations civil scope. The Planning Engineer should keep in mind that piping and pipe racks are
often fabricated offsite and many require coating prior to delivery to site. Racks and equipment will require
foundations to be in place while piping will require racks and equipment in place. An exception may be
underground pipe, which will be required early in the project. The Contractor schedule should also include inline
valves and controls delivery in parallel with pipe spool delivery. E&I installation generally doesn’t start until
piping and equipment is sufficiently progressed in an area to avoid damaging E&I materials when
moving/positioning pipe and equipment or doing any heavy civil work.
Similar to construction, fabrication work is driven by having sufficient deliverables to start work and work
efficiently. Fabrication start dates should be driven by issue of AFC primary steel drawings. A good rule of
thumb is to not plan to start fabrication before all primary steel drawings are planned to be complete, plus a
reasonable allowance between EP Contractor primary AFC promise dates and the dates as promised to the
fabricator plus an allowance for the fabricator to prepare shop drawings. The allowance is not only required to
account for any slippage that may occur during engineering and to protect BP from late drawing claims but to
ensure a good start to the project, and more likely success. Further to this, the EP Contractor will often release a
bulk material MTO to facilitate steel orders. This should also be conditioned before communicating to the
fabricator, when the fabricator is not ordering from a direct drawing material take off occurring after receipt off
drawings. Engineering Contractor release of a bulk MTO is often done to allow an earlier order of structural
material and subsequently an earlier start of fabrication.
Fabrication planning should reflect a certain amount of phasing of start dates by discipline in the order of
structural, equipment, piping, E&I with painting occurring at various points in the process. Pipe fabrication is
often occurring simultaneous with steel erection to ensure pipe spools are fabricated and ready to erect as soon as
sufficient structure and equipment is in place. Often, below deck and rack piping, not attached to equipment
nozzles, will be prioritized for pre installation in the deck elevations or in the lower reaches of hull sections in
the case of floating systems. Typically a minimum of 3 months of productive pipe fabrication will be needed to
achieve sufficient spool backlog to support a sustained period of pipe erection.
The Planning Engineer should review the schedule issue dates for the first and last piping isometrics, relative to
when the Contractor would like to start fab and make sure there is a sufficient ‘cushion’ between the Engineering
Contractor promise dates and the dates provided to the fabricator. Further to this, the Engineering Contractor will
generally release a bulk piping MTO of sufficient quality to initial order piping materials. The timing of this
should also be considered as a key interface between the Engineering and Fabrication Contractors and
appropriately conditioned. An early bulk piping MTO from the Engineering Contractor is usually intended to
facilitate an early start of pipe fabrication.
Piping fabrication durations and qualification of associated weld procedures and welders are often under
estimated by Contractors and Owners. Fabrication Contractor fabrication facilities and rates of production, shop
loading and market conditions should be understood by the Planning Engineer as part of validating a fabrication
schedule. A good rule of thumb is to use 6-8 weeks from issue of materials to final QC of a piping spool hence a
Planning Engineer should not expect to see any spool delivery prior to 2 months after start of fabrication.
Another good rule of thumb is that 80% of isometrics issued and 60% of material availability will generally
provide security of for the pipe fabricator. The Planning Engineer should also be cognizant whether the 60%
material order is just line pipe or pipe and fittings as little to no progress can be achieved with line pipe alone.
As structures are being erected, there are key hinge dates in the schedule which should be represented in the
schedule as milestones. The erections of deck elevations are key events that direct many of the schedule
requirements. For example, all major equipment is generally required to be installed on a lower deck elevation
prior to setting the next deck elevation over the lower elevation, thereby making access for equipment setting
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 94 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
much more difficult and inefficient and often disturbing the normal flow of work. Determining equipment ROS
dates must include access issues such as these. Another key issue regards equipment setting. A project will have
made a decision as to whether set equipment on a deck before erecting the deck section or installing equipment
after erecting the deck section. Either way, the deck erection date must be logic linked to installation of
equipment.
Equipment installation dates are also key dates. It is very important that the Contractor reflects the set date for
each major piece of equipment and that this set date is logic linked to equipment delivery and to the area
readiness to receive this equipment. The set dates should be reflected in the baseline schedule. Although it is not
desired, it is not unusual for an equipment item to show up later than promised. In these cases, the only way to
judge if a Contractor’s schedule is impacted is for the Contractor to show the true required installation date in the
schedule. Likewise, this can protect BP interest when an equipment item shows up later than promised, and the
Contractor is not prepared to set the equipment. It is not unheard for Contractors to claim late delivery when an
item arrives later than promised, even though they are not truly impacted.
Other key issues for the Planning Engineer to consider which apply to both site construction and fabrication are:
















Piping erection sequence should generally indicate large bore ahead of small bore piping. The Planning
Engineer should understand if and how this is being handled in the schedule.
Planning Engineer should be cognizant of concrete cure time requirements prior to setting equipment and
should be sure the Contractor reflects this in their schedule.
First civil activity (excluding site prep) is unlikely to happen before engineering is 50% complete.
Due to risk of changes, challenge a contractor on any AFC issues appearing before the 60% model review
for an area. Contractor work flows and procedures should preclude this.
A Planning Engineer should be aware that onshore pipe rack erection is not complete until the rack has been
‘rattled out’, meaning the bolting has been torqued. Many times a Contractor will erect entire racks and
come back later for torqueing. Racks can’t be loaded with pipe or other items before the torqueing is
complete.
Onshore equipment setting is not complete until grouting of the base has been completed.
Painting is never complete until “touch up” is complete. Planning Engineers should insist the contractor
include separate activities for paint touch up due to potential to impact other ongoing works.
Relationship of E&I start to heavy trades – starting too early can lead to damaged E&I equipment, rework
and personnel density issues. Planning Engineers should be aware when Contractors propose E&I work
particularly instrumentation or cable pulling in areas that have ongoing hotwork or blasting and painting.
E&I cable tray installation should generally be planned for after piping installation within the same area to
avoid rework of trays when clashes occur. Don’t plan to start above ground E&I installation in an area until
pipe erection is at least 50% complete.
Contractors should look for opportunities to maximize the work in area before ‘covering’ an area with deck
elevations or pipe racks and piping, or other equipment or otherwise limiting access.
Concurrent construction and commissioning leads to inefficiencies for both work groups and tends to make
each group's durations longer.
A common understanding between the Contractor and BP of the meaning of ‘Mechanical Completion’ is
critical and must be part of the contract language. The Planning Engineer should participate with project
management in ensuring this common understanding is reached early in the project.
Contractor and BP should also having a common understanding of the meaning of “substantially complete”
or “practical completion” should these milestones be in use.
Allowing sufficient time between planned MC dates and ready for sailaway also helps to reduce the amount
of work that will be carried over offshore. Carryover work completion costs multiples over finishing the
work onshore. Do not underestimate paintings ability to be or get on the critical path. This often happens in
shipyards when FPSO, semi or other hull components are required to be painted before going in a dry dock
for assembly. This can also occur at sites and fab yards as blasting and painting is more sensitive to weather
than other trades and cannot be carried out concurrently in the same area as other trades.
Projects requiring load out should reflect preparation of grillage and other pre works to be complete prior to
start of load and should also ensure the load out Contractor has allowed sufficient time in the schedule to
complete load out and tie down activities. When working in live facilities (Brownfield/TAR) Planning
Engineers should verify how Contractors have factored in permitting, access, density and other constraints in
their planning process.
Offshore Installation Contractors are typically initially engaged to mobilize within a window. Heavy Lift
Contractors generally have a six month window. Planning Engineers are to plan to the early date of these
windows. As the window nears, durations will be reduced and the Planning Engineer will reflect any new
early date and plan to this date. Planning Engineers will continually plan to early dates.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 95 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure




Offshore installations may require making topsides quarters habitable before demobilization of an HLV.
This should be reflected in the offshore schedule.
Offshore and onshore pipelay and testing, pigging, gauging, drying as required are seldom done
contiguously. Planning Engineers will need to reflect these in the schedule as unique activities.
Offshore mooring suction piles generally require set up time before loading. This must be reflected in the
schedule. Depending on the pile type and purpose, set up time could be 90 to 180 days. The installation team
will confirm the requirements.
Offshore hull installation will generally require ballasting capability before any load is applied. This must be
well understood and accounted for in the in installation schedule.
Offshore survey technology has advanced to the point that subsea jumper fabrication can be completed in its
entirety without additional metrology if the flanges/hub faces are integral to the foundation system or guide
base. The Planning Engineer should confirm early in the project as to the project philosophy in this regard.
There is a substantial difference in jumper installation time requirements when metrology is required before
completing fabrication of the jumper as opposed to having a jumper prefabricated completely.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 96 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix G Contractor Resource Loading
The following figure shows an overall typical resource-loading manpower chart.
Manpow er Planned
Manpower Plan, Actual and Forecast
Manpow er Actual
160
Manpow er Forecast
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
ov
-1
2
N
Se
p12
O
ct
-1
2
Ju
l-1
2
Au
g12
12
Ju
n12
12
M
ay
-
Ap
r-
Fe
b12
M
ar
-1
2
Ja
n12
ec
-1
1
D
ov
-1
1
N
Se
p11
O
ct
-1
1
Ju
l-1
1
Au
g11
Ju
n11
0
In the above example, the Contractor did not reach peak manpower, and the project over ran the duration by 3
months. Depending on the phase and deliverables, this may or may not have impacted critical path. This scenario
can generally be managed in the engineering phase, while in construction or fabrication, it would likely affect the
critical path.
The following chart depicts a manpower plan that was the result of over-estimated manhour requirements. This is
not uncommon, particularly in the early estimating of manhours, which are sometimes overstated by Contractors
in the interest of being conservative.
Manpow er Planned
Manpower Plan, Actual and Forecast
Manpow er Actual
160
Manpow er Forecast
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 97 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Ju
l-1
2
Ju
n12
12
M
ay
-
12
Ap
r-
12
M
ar
-
Fe
b12
Ja
n12
ec
-1
1
D
ov
-1
1
N
ct
-1
1
O
Se
p11
Au
g11
Ju
l-1
1
Ju
n11
0
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
In the above example, the Contractor was able to complete the work on time with less manpower than originally
planned due to over estimating on the front end. Contractors should be encouraged to reflect realistic manpower
requirements to avoid overstating estimated budgets.
It is not unusual for a Contractor to depict manpower and progress on the same chart. This is deemed a
recommended practice as it allows a visualization of the relationship between manpower and progress. When
variances occur, they should trend in the same direction
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 98 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix H Progress Measurement and Reporting
Engineering Progress
The following table shows an example of progress-weighting a design drawing for an engineering deliverable.
The manhour budget assigned to each deliverable is earned as each step is completed for this deliverable.
Progress weighting steps are generally referred to as ‘rules of credit’.
The following rules of credit are displayed as an example only. The BP Planning Engineer is to review and agree
the Contractors’ submitted rules of credit.
Typical Progress Weighting for Engineering Deliverables
P&IDs
Start
Issue for Client Review
Client Review Comments
Issue for HAZOP
HAZOP Comments
Issue for Client Approval
Client Approval Comments
Issue for Design
Progress Weighting
Step
Cumulative
10%
10%
20%
30%
5%
35%
35%
70%
5%
75%
10%
85%
5%
90%
10%
100%
M aterial Requisition
Start
Issue for Integrated Review
Integrated Rev Comments
Issue for Bid/M RQ
Issue for Tech Bid Evaluation
Issue M aterial Requisition for Purchase
10%
30%
5%
10%
30%
15%
10%
40%
45%
55%
85%
100%
M aterial Handling Study
Start
Issue for Internal Review
Internal Review Comments
Issue for Client Review
Client Review Comments
Issue for Use
10%
50%
5%
15%
5%
15%
10%
60%
65%
80%
85%
100%
Procurement Progress
There is a widespread methodology for the measurement basis of procurement in use by the industry. It includes:





A commitment curve that measures money based on PO awards.
An expenditure curve that measures money based on PO invoices and/or payments.
Workhours spent on efforts to purchase materials.
A document basis that is a count of Pos.
The earned value basis. The progress milestones (rules of credit) are calculated for the entire procurement
cycle, from bid documents through to the delivery of equipment and materials.
The following graph shows a comparison of different methods used to measure procurement progress. Note how
front end loaded the commitment-based method is.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 99 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Procurement Progress Methods
100.0%
80.0%
60.0%
40.0%
20.0%
Count of PO Awd
% of $ Commt'd
Expenditures
Earned Value
Actual Delivery
Dec-03
Oct-03
Nov-03
Sep-03
Jul-03
Aug-03
Jun-03
Apr-03
May-03
Mar-03
Jan-03
Feb-03
Dec-02
Oct-02
Nov-02
Sep-02
Jul-02
Aug-02
Jun-02
Apr-02
May-02
Mar-02
Jan-02
Feb-02
Dec-01
Oct-01
Nov-01
Sep-01
Jul-01
Aug-01
Jun-01
0.0%
Procurement Labor
Comparison of Procurement Progress Methods
The following procurement progress curve and earned value table are from a BP Major Project. The table has
been abbreviated. Contractors will generally apply the milestones and weighting in Primavera to generate the
curve.
Procurement Progress Curve
100.0%
90.0%
Planned % Complete
Actual % Complete
80.0%
% Complete
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
Ja
n08
Fe
b08
M
ar
-0
8
Ap
r08
M
ay
-0
8
Ju
n08
Ju
l-0
8
Au
g08
Se
p08
O
ct
-0
8
N
ov
-0
8
D
ec
-0
8
Ja
n09
Fe
b09
M
ar
-0
9
Ap
r09
M
ay
-0
9
Ju
n09
Ju
l-0
9
Au
g09
Se
p09
O
ct
-0
9
N
ov
-0
9
D
ec
-0
9
0.0%
Sample Procurement Progress Curve
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 100 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Earned Value - Topsides Procurement Progress
Value
Weight
Factor
Issue RFQ
5%
Issue PO
10%
Vendor
Draw ings
10%
Ex Works
35%
Delivery
10%
Earned Value
Percent
complete
15-Jan-10
15-Jan-10
15-Jan-10
16-M ar-10
16-M ar-10
16-M ar-10
15-M ay-10
15-M ay-10
15-M ay-10
01-Jun-11
16-Nov-10
16-Nov-10
12-Sep-11
01-Aug-11
$45,000,000
$6,708,000
$2,700,000
100.0%
100.0%
90.0%
2.19% 14-M ar-10
7.86% 20-M ar-10
16.88% 15-Jun-10
16.88% 15-Jun-10
0.34% 20-Jul-10
18.91% 20-Jul-10
100.00%
01-Jun-10
18-Jun-10
13-Sep-10
13-Sep-10
18-Oct-10
18-Oct-10
31-Jul-10
17-Aug-10
12-Nov-10
12-Nov-10
17-Dec-10
01-Feb-11
18-Feb-11
$2,925,000
$10,477,800
$6,250,000
$6,250,000
$125,000
$4,200,000
$84,635,800
90.0%
90.0%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
15.0%
57.1%
Item
Seaw ater Treatment Skid (LoSal/SRU and Ultra Filtration)
Oil Pipeline Pumps (motor driven)
Firew ater Pump Packages
Glycol Contactor, Gas Glycol Exchanger, Glycol Regen
Skid
Pumps, Centrifugal Vertical Turbine
VRU/LP Compressor Skid (motor driven)
HP/Export Gas Compressor Skid (motor driven)
Hypochlorite Generator Skid
Living Quarters
Total
$45,000,000
$6,708,000
$3,000,000
$3,250,000
$11,642,000
$25,000,000
$25,000,000
$500,000
$28,000,000
$148,100,000
30.38%
4.53%
2.03%
Sample Earned Value Chart for Topsides Procurement Progress
The task in each column establishes measurable milestones, and the dollar value of the PO establishes the weight
factor for each milestone. Larger equipment carries greater impact than smaller widgets.
Typical progressable elements and units of measure are shown below. The Contractor progress system should be
very clear in the units and weighting of progressable materials installation. The following series of tables provide
guidance for typical Contractor rules of credit. These values are not mandated by BP, but the Planning Engineer
should verify that the Contractor rules of credit are not significantly dissimilar from these to avoid the Contractor
front loading the schedule progress.
Construction/Fabrication
Rules of Credit
BP does not mandate rules of credit but reserves the right to review and comment on Contractor rules of credit.
Rules of Credit represent steps in progress and no credit shall be claimed unless the “step” has been completed.
Contractors cannot earn duration based progress between agreed steps (rules of credit). The following are
sample rules of credit for reference to typical weightings. Contractor’s weightings should be similar.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 101 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK
Report percentage of the total cubic yards involved.
TANK PADS (soil)
A
%
of
compacted
85%
earth in place
B
Final dressing
100%
CONCRETE (foundations and structures)
Report by the percentage of the total cubic yards involved w ith the
follow ing allow ances:
A
Rebar in place
20% (20.00)
B
Forming complete
70% (50.00)
C
Concrete poured
80% (10.00)
D
Stripping complete
95% (15.00)
E
Dressed and patched
100% (5.00)
PILES
Report by the number in place as a percentage of the total required.
PAVING
Report by square feet installed against the total square feet required.
Sew ers and M anholes (fabricated offsite)
A
M anholes and catch basins
installed by count
B
Hookup and connections
complete by count
C
Test and checkout complete by
count
65% (65.00)
90% (25.00)
100% (10.00)
STEEL STRUCTURES, PIPING SUPPORTS, AND
M ISCELLANEOUS STEEL
A
Report by tons erected
90%
B
Bolting tension checked and
100%
completed
BUILDINGS (excluding foundations)
Shelter Type (no interior w ork)
A
Steel erected
50%
B
Walls and roof complete
90%
C
Checked out complete
100%
M asonary Type
A
Walls erected
30%
B
Roof framing complete
50%
C
Doors and w indow s installed
65%
D
Interior complete
100%
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 102 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
(50.00)
(40.00)
(10.00)
(30.00)
(20.00)
(15.00)
(35.00)
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
COLUM NS AND VESSELS
Shop Fabricated (no internals)
A
Set in place
60% (60.00)
B
Secured and grouted
90% (30.00)
C
Tested and bolted up
100% (10.00)
Shop Fabricated (w ith trays or internals)
A
Set in place
25% (25.00)
B
Secured and grouted
35% (10.00)
C
Internals complete
90% (55.00)
D
Tested and bolted up
100% (10.00)
Field Fabricated
Report by number of prefabricated rings and internals installed from
the subContractor erection schedule. Allow appropriate percent
complete for these w ork elements.
Storage Tanks (field fabricated)
Report by base, number of rings installed, roof, and internals from the
subContractor erection schedule. Allow an appropriate percent
complete for these w ork elements.
EXCHANGERS
Shell and Tube (per unit)
A
Set in place
B
Secured and grouted
C
Tested and accepted
Fin - Tube (per unit)
A
Set in place
B
Secured and grouted
C
Tested and accepted
Fin Fans (per unit)
A
Steel structure erected
B
Housing erected
C
Fan and driver assembled
D
Coils installed
E
Run-in and fan balance
F
Tested and accepted
Vertical Fired Heaters (package unit)
A
Heater set in place
B
Stack erected
C
Secured and grouted
D
Tested and accepted
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 103 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
60% (60.00)
90% (30.00)
100% (10.00)
60% (60.00)
90% (30.00)
100% (10.00)
20%
30%
50%
70%
90%
100%
(20.00)
(10.00)
(20.00)
(20.00)
(20.00)
(10.00)
50%
70%
90%
100%
(50.00)
(20.00)
(20.00)
(10.00)
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
PUM PS AND DRIVERS
A
Pump set in place
B
Aligned and grouted
C
Run-in and accepted
Package Compressor (w ith driver)
A
Set in place
B
Secured and grouted
C
Run-in and accepted
Package Compressor (w ith driver separate)
A
Compressor in place
B
Driver in place
C
Unit coupled and aligned
D
Secured and grouted
E
Run-in and accepted
40% (40.00)
90% (50.00)
100% (10.00)
50% (50.00)
90% (40.00)
100% (10.00)
25%
50%
85%
90%
100%
(25.00)
(25.00)
(35.00)
(15.00)
(10.00)
Note: Fabricators/Constructors will often want to measure piping by number of spools. There is a significant
difference in the fabrication and installation of a 2” 150# system spool and a 24” 600# system spool. Number of
spools fabricated and erected is a valid metric as a key performance indicator but does not serve value for
accurate progress measurement.
It is recommended that piping total progress should reserve 15% for hydrotesting, flushing, reinstatement and
leak testing, although whatever reserve is decided by the project should reflect the level of effort.
PIPING
Percentage complete in this account can be reported in the follow ing
categories by the method indicated:
A
Fabricated pipe
By tonnage fabricated
spools
B
Pip spools installed
By tonnage installed
C
Straight run racked
By tonnage installed
pipe
D
Underground lines
By tonnage installed
E
F
Steam tracing
Report % of L F inst.
Hangers and supports Tonnage installed
G
Hydrotesting
Counted each and reported by
subsystem
In addition to this typical measurement basis, piping fabrication may also be measured by diameter/inches of
shop welds and installation by diameter/inches of field welds. Number of bolts up is also a key metric for
tracking piping progress but does not account for level of effort due to variances in pipe diameters and wall
thicknesses.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 104 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
D
ELECTRICAL
Pow er and control
As installed by count
unit
Lighting equipment
Report % installed by count
U. G. conduit and
Report % of L F inst.
duct
A. G. conduit (pow er) Report % of L F inst.
E
A. G. conduit (lighting) Report % of L F inst.
F
Pow er and control
w ire
Pow er connections
Grounding
Lighting w ire
Pushbuttons and
receptacle
Communications
A
B
C
G
H
I
J
K
Report % total feet pulled
Report
Report
Report
Report
%
%
%
%
of
of
of
of
total complete
feet installed
feet installed
total installed
Report by system complete
INSTRUM ENTATION
Control Panels (includes shop-mounted instruments)
A
Install panels
25% (25.00)
B
Hookup and connect
85% (60.00)
C
Test and checkout
100% (15.00)
Instruments and instrument materials
A
Wire and conduit
% of linear feet installed
B
Piping and tubing
% of linear feet installed
C
Field mounted
% installed by count
instruments
D
Control and relief % installed by count
valves
E
Racks and support
% of linear feet installed
F
Hookups
As completed by count
G
Loop checks
As completed by system
It is important for the Planning Engineer to understand how the Contractor weights items relative to size and
complexity and that any significant increases in level of effort are reflected in the progress weighting. An
example might be an instrument that can be hand carried vs. and instrument that requires craneage.
A
B
A
B
INSULATION
Vessels and tow ers % square feet
Piping
% square feet
PAINTING
Vessels, tanks,
% square feet
Piping
% square feet
installed
installed
covered
covered
The following table depicts the inputs and work processes leading to a typical Contractors progress report.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 105 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
 COST ESTIMATE
 SCHEDULE
Feedback
and Update
 EXECUTION PLAN
PROGRESS REPORTING
MEASUREMENT BASIS
CORRECTIVE
MEASURES AND
FORECASTS
Plans
MEASUREMENT OF
WORK PERFORMED
PROGRESS REPORT
- Quantities Installed
- Workhours Expended
- Resources Expended
- Restraints
- Status of Project
- Schedule Analysis
- Statistical Analysis
- Critical Activities
- Areas of Concern
Actuals
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
OF WORK PERFORMED
- Productivities
- Resource Utilization
- Quality of Work
Construction progress is often summated as demonstrated in the example below which includes productivity:
Typical Progress Sum m ary Report
Physical Com plet ion
WBS Code
(1)
XX-YY-CI
XX-YY-ST
XX-YY-M E
XX-YY-PI
XX-YY-EL
XX-YY-IN
XX-YY-IS
XX-YY-PT
Descript ion
(2)
Civil
Structural
M echanical
Piping
Electrical
Instrumentation
Insulation
Painting
Tot al Project
Budget
Manhours
(1000)
(3)
450
854
410
1030
150
175
150
300
3519
Weight
(4)
12.8%
24.3%
11.7%
29.3%
4.3%
5.0%
4.3%
8.5%
100.0%
WBS
Code %
Com p
(5)
100.0%
89.0%
80.0%
55.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
30.0%
Project
(6) = (4)x(5)
12.8%
21.6%
9.3%
16.1%
0.9%
0.7%
0.4%
2.6%
64.4%
Earned
Manhours
(1000)
(7)= (3)x(5)
450
760
328
567
30
26
15
90
2266
Expended
Manhours
(1000)
(8)
550
710
500
600
50
30
12
80
2532
Product ivit y Index
(9)= (7)/(8)
0.8
1.1
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.1
0.9
Construction discipline progress is summated to overall project progress for a Delivery Area as shown below
including variance as required by BP:
Discipline
Civil
Structural
M echanical
Piping
Electrical
Instrumentation
Painting
Tot al
Weighting
12.8%
24.3%
11.7%
29.3%
4.3%
5.0%
4.3%
8.5%
Planned
100.0%
95.0%
38.1%
22.2%
9.8%
11.0%
9.8%
35.4%
Cumulative
Actual
95.0%
95.0%
40.0%
20.0%
10.0%
12.0%
10.0%
38.4%
Variance
-5.0%
0.0%
1.9%
-2.2%
0.2%
1.0%
0.2%
3.0%
Planned
2.1%
2.1%
3.1%
3.1%
3.1%
4.6%
3.1%
3.6%
Period
Actual
7.1%
1.2%
3.6%
3.6%
3.8%
4.0%
3.8%
0.6%
Variance
5.0%
-0.9%
0.5%
0.5%
0.7%
-0.6%
0.7%
-3.0%
Hook Up Weighting and Progress Guideline
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 106 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Similar to TARs, hook ups are typically planned by workpacks and/or job cards. The following figure shows an
example of how a work package might be developed for a piping tie-in scope of work and the estimated
workhours it will take to complete. The workhours are determined by typical rules of credit, established and
agreed by the project prior to beginning creation of the work packs.
Work Package Tie In 84
M aterial Bagged and Tagged
M easure, Fab and Hydrotest, Paint Spool
Installed
Tested
Insulation
Final Acceptance
Total M anhours
Hours
4
16
40
8
8
4
80
TI
Tie In Spool #84
Example of a Work Package
Once the work packages are defined, they are listed in a ledger for measuring and reporting progress. The figure
below is an example of a simple ledger for piping integration work packages. A ledger for other disciplines or
fabrication and construction work would be much the same as this.
Priority
System
Work
Package
Budget
Hours
1
212
84
2
212
85
2
212
86
Piping Work Packages Totals
80
120
120
320
M aterial Bagged
and Tagged
5%
20-Feb-2012
20-Feb-2012
20-Feb-2012
100.0%
Fabricated,
Final
Hydro and Paint Installed
Tested
Insulated Acceptance
20%
50%
10%
10%
5%
15-Jan-2012 1-M ar-2012 2-M ar-2012
20-Jan-2012 5-M ar-2012
20-Jan-2012
100.0%
62.5%
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Earned
Hours
Percent
Complete
68
90
30
188
85.0%
75.0%
25.0%
58.8%
Work Package Ledger for Piping Work
Installation
The following table provides a general guideline as to how offshore installation progress should be progress
weighted for aggregating progress and the typical progress rule to be applied to the activity. Physical progress
rules are applied, although there is some variation of how the physical progress is assessed.
Item
Weighting for Roll Up
Progress Rule
Mooring and other Subsea Piles
Installation
Contract Value
Weighted to tonnage of each
Hull Installation, Mooring
Contract Value
Days earned per budgeted days
Fixed Substructures (jackets) and
piles
Contract Value
Days earned per budgeted days
Topsides/Rigs
Contract Value
Days earned per budgeted days
Subsea Equipment
Contract Value
Per each or, if significant
differences in level of effort
between types of equipment
installation, weighted per tonnage
Jumpers and rigid tie in spools
Contract Value
Per each or, if significant
differences in level of effort
between types of jumpers, weighted
per tonnage
Flowlines, Gas Lift, Water
Injection, Gas Injection
Contract Value
Per meters/feet installed
withholding 5% to 15% for
flushing, testing and tie-ins,
depending on complexity of work
Export Pipelines
Contract Value
Per meters/feet installed
withholding 5% to 15% for
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 107 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
flushing, testing and tie-ins,
depending on complexity of work
Riser Pull Ins including flexible
risers
Contract Value
Each weighted to tonnage, if
significant differences exist in riser
sizes and complexity of installation.
If riser pull ins include subsea tiein, withhold allowance for tie-ins
an testing
Umbilicals
Contract Value
Per meters/feet installed,
withholding 5% to 15% for
flushing, testing, and tie-ins and
filling, depending on complexity of
work (some progress could be
deferred to topsides tie-ins)
Flying Leads
Contract Value
Each with testing reserve of (5%)
Hook Up and Commissioning
Total Contracts Value (multiple
Contractors are typically involved)
Manhours earned vs. budgeted.
Manhours developed from work
package system
Overall Progress Measurement
Overall progress measurement will be a mathematical summation of the progress elements as shown in this
section and depicted in the following tables.
Delivery Area
Original Control
Budget Value M M
A
50.0
10.0
150.0
250.0
460.0
Delivery Area
Progress Calcs
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull and M ooring
Topsides
Facilities Total
Physical Earned Value
Progress
MM
Total Progress
B
C = A * B D = C / Sum A
28.3%
14.2
3.1%
38.4%
3.8
3.5%
37.7%
56.6
12.3%
14.0%
35.0
7.6%
109.6
23.8%
A sample of Define progress is shown in the following table. A variation of this is to report plan and variance
from plan since actual is inferred. This is generally used at executive-level reporting. The information below will
be required output of the Planning Engineer aggregating the progress.
Define Progress
Delivery Area
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull and M ooring
Topsides
Facilities Total
Weight
21.9%
13.7%
27.2%
37.2%
100.0%
Planned
28.6%
36.4%
38.6%
12.7%
21.6%
Cumulative
Actual
Variance
28.3%
-0.2%
38.4%
2.0%
37.7%
-0.9%
14.0%
1.4%
23.8%
2.2%
Planned
3.3%
3.6%
6.0%
1.3%
3.6%
Period
Actual
3.5%
1.6%
5.5%
1.6%
3.1%
Variance
0.2%
-2.0%
-0.5%
0.3%
-0.5%
An example of an Execute summary progress table is shown below.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 108 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Execute Overall Progress Reporting
Delivery Area
Phase
Subsea
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Flow line Procurement
Fabrication
Export Pipeline
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Pipeline Procurement
Fabrication
Hull and M ooring
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Fabrication
Topsides
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Fabrication
Transport and Install
Subtotal
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull and M oorings
Topsides
HUC
Subtotal
Facilities Total
Total
Planned
28.6%
100.0%
38.1%
41.2%
9.8%
35.4%
100.0%
55.2%
45.4%
12.6%
38.6%
83.5%
58.7%
17.8%
12.7%
50.5%
28.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
21.6%
Cumulative
Actual
Variance
28.3%
-0.2%
95.0%
-5.0%
40.0%
1.9%
40.0%
-1.2%
10.0%
0.2%
38.4%
3.0%
100.0%
0.0%
60.0%
4.8%
50.0%
4.6%
15.0%
2.4%
37.7%
-0.9%
85.0%
1.5%
60.0%
1.3%
15.0%
-2.8%
14.0%
1.4%
60.0%
9.5%
30.0%
1.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.1%
0.5%
Period
Actual
3.5%
1.2%
3.6%
4.0%
3.8%
0.6%
0.0%
8.0%
12.0%
3.0%
5.5%
3.2%
5.1%
6.1%
1.6%
5.6%
4.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.4%
Planned
3.3%
2.1%
3.1%
4.6%
3.1%
3.6%
0.0%
6.0%
10.0%
2.0%
6.0%
3.0%
5.6%
6.7%
1.3%
4.8%
3.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.6%
Variance
0.2%
-0.9%
0.5%
-0.6%
0.7%
-3.0%
0.0%
2.0%
2.0%
1.0%
-0.5%
0.2%
-0.5%
-0.6%
0.3%
0.8%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-1.2%
Progress Curves
Examples of Progress Curves:
Following is an example of a typical early curve. In this example the project this is slightly ahead of schedule:
Typical Early Curve
100%
90%
Plan
80%
Actual
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Plan
Actual
n07
13-Jan-07
6-Jan-07
1Ja
6
7-Dec-06
2-Nov-06
1D
ec
-0
6
6
5-Oct-06
1N
1O
ov
-0
ct
-0
p06
7-Sep-06
1Se
3-Aug-06
g06
1Au
6-Jul-06
l-0
6
1Ju
1-Jun-06
n06
4-May-06
06
6-Apr-06
1Ju
ay
-
6
1M
1Ap
r-0
2-Mar-06
ar
-0
6
2-Feb-06
1M
5-Jan-06
1-Dec-05
1Fe
b06
n06
1Ja
1D
ec
-0
5
0%
0.0% 4.5% 9.1% 14.4% 21.9% 31.2% 44.7% 61.0% 72.2% 83.3% 91.1% 97.6% 99.7% 99.9% 100.0%
0.0% 3.8% 11.0% 16.0% 24.0% 35.0% 48.0% 65.0% 76.0%
Late Start Curves are often depicted with Early Start Curves and referred to as a ‘banana’ curve or ‘progress
envelope’. The following chart depicts and early/late progress envelope.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 109 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Note: forecast curves are required on all plans but were omitted from this graphic for clarity.
Forecast Curves
In the chart below, alarms should have been sounded in the first months of the project. The curve shows 15%
behind schedule (y axis) about 30% down the original timeline (x axis). This is typically not recoverable without
drastic actions.
Plan
Early Curve, Actual and Forecast Indicating Potential Delay to Project
Actual
Forecast
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
May-07
Apr-07
Mar-07
7
r-0
ay
-0
7
M
Feb-07
Ap
-0
7
M
Fe
b
ar
-0
7
Jan-07
Nov-06
Dec-06
6
Ja
n07
6
c-0
Oct-06
-0
6
v-0
De
Sep-06
No
Oc
t
Aug-06
-0
6
Se
p
Jul-06
6
g06
l-0
Ju
Au
Jun-06
6
r-0
n06
Ju
M
Ap
ay
-0
6
May-06
4.5%
2.0%
Apr-06
0.0%
0.0%
Mar-06
-0
6
ar
-0
6
M
Fe
b
Feb-06
Plan
Actual
Forecast
Jan-06
Ja
n06
0%
9.1% 14.4% 21.9% 31.2% 44.7% 61.0% 72.2% 83.3% 91.1% 97.6% 99.7% 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
3.0% 6.0% 12.0% 20.0% 30.0%
30.0% 46.0% 57.0% 67.0% 75.0% 82.0% 88.0% 92.0% 95.0% 98.0% 100.0%
Page 110 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Progress Worksheets
A very simplistic example of an overall progress worksheet is shown below.
Export Pipeline
Hull and M oorings
Topsides
Faclities
Dec-2012
Nov-2012
Oct-2012
Sep-2012
Aug-2012
Jul-2012
Jun-2012
May-2012
Apr-2012
Mar-2012
Feb-2012
Jan-2012
Dec-2011
Nov-2011
8.4%
Oct-2011
Subsea
Element
Weight
Sep-2011
Delivery Area
Plan %
Forecast %
Actual %
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 38.0% 48.0% 58.0% 65.0% 73.0% 85.0%
35.0% 45.0% 58.0% 69.0% 83.0%
0.0% 8.0% 15.0% 25.0% 35.0%
96.0%
94.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Plan %
Forecast %
Actual %
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 38.0% 48.0% 58.0% 65.0% 73.0% 85.0%
35.0% 45.0% 58.0% 69.0% 83.0%
0.0% 8.0% 15.0% 25.0% 35.0%
96.0%
94.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Plan %
Forecast %
Actual %
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 38.0% 48.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
35.0% 45.0% 58.0% 69.0% 83.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
0.0% 8.0% 15.0% 25.0% 35.0%
Plan %
Forecast %
Actual %
0.0%
5.0%
0.0%
8.0%
Plan %
Forecast %
Actual %
0.0%
4.2%
3.8%
83.7%
10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%
22.0% 32.0% 43.0% 55.0% 65.0%
12.0% 17.0% 22.0%
70.0%
75.0%
80.0%
86.0%
90.0%
94.0%
95.0%
95.0%
97.0%
97.0%
98.0%
98.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
0.0%
5.8% 11.6% 18.8% 24.6% 34.6% 44.3% 54.0% 64.3%
24.1% 34.1% 45.4% 57.3% 67.9%
8.0% 12.5% 18.3% 24.1%
74.4%
78.3%
83.3%
88.3%
91.6%
95.0%
95.8%
95.8%
97.5%
97.5%
98.3% 100.0%
98.3% 100.0%
Aggregating Progress Curves
The following example shows a very simple roll up scenario with 3 WBS elements rolled up to 1 overall curve.
Notice how Contractor 3’s impact on the overall performance indicates a high value weighting and poor progress
that leads to a significant impact in the overall progress and forecasting. Obviously, this is not a desirable
scenario and this kind of result would require intervention or rebaseline.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 111 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Manpower Reporting
The following graph depicts a combined progress curve and resource histogram for a small FEED project. The
same principles can be used for any size project, but a small project was selected as an example for the sake of
legibility in this procedure. Note in this example, the project struggled to meet the resource requirements,
subsequently fell behind schedule and was unable to recover, therefore adding 4 months to duration. This is not a
positive outcome and had this particular FEED been on the critical path of the project, substantial efforts would
have been required in later phases to recover schedule and maintain the finish date or a rebaseline would have
been called for at the end of Define.
The above format is the preferred format for Contractor reporting of individual and roll up scope development.
It is very important to note that sometimes a disconnect in progress and manpower levels is simply a result of
poor estimating and norms being applied in the resource loading of the schedule or simply a desire of a
Contractor to imply higher requirements to insure the real Contractor staffing levels are met.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 112 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
The above example shows all elements of a good progress curve including plan, actual and forecast of both
progress and manpower. There should be a very clear correlation between this data.
The BP project monthly report Delivery Areas may include their respective graphs. Delivery Area formats
mimics the overall report format and is shown in the following series of charts:
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 113 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
BP Monthly Reporting
Progress Tables
The sample reporting included in this section is taken from a deepwater Greenfield project, but the same
principles will apply across all projects. Although a project may develop project specific reporting formats, the
data reported will be consistent with this procedure.
An example of a typical Define summary progress table with metrics follows:
Reporting Period
Delivery Package
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull and M ooring
Topsides
Facilities
Planned
48.0%
48.0%
48.0%
20.0%
24.6%
Cumulative
Actual
35.0%
35.0%
35.0%
22.0%
24.1%
Jan-12
Variance
-13.0%
-13.0%
-13.0%
2.0%
-0.4%
Planned
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
5.0%
5.8%
Period
Actual
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
5.0%
5.8%
Variance
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Note: By Reporting Period
Delivery Package
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull and M ooring
Topsides
Facilities
Cumulative
RFQs Placed
Purchase Orders Issued
Planned
Actual
Variance Planned
Actual
Variance
1
0
-1
2
3
1
2
3
1
4
3
-1
3
2
-1
4
6
2
7
6
-1
3
14
11
13
11
-2
13
26
13
The Execute stage monthly report will include the progress data for period and cumulative down to the WBS
phase level (EPCI). The following tables depict a summary overall progress table which would be included in the
executive summary section of a monthly report.
Delivery Package
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull
M oorings
Topsides
Facilities
Planned
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Cumulative
Actual
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Period
Variance Planned Actual Variance
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
The following table represents a depiction of a progress table which includes Level 3 Delivery Area components.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 114 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Execute Overall Progress Reporting
Delivery Package
Phase
Subsea
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Flow line Procurement
Fabrication
Export Pipeline
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Pipeline Procurement
Fabrication
Hull and M ooring
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Fabrication
Topsides
Subtotal
Detailed Engineering
Procurement
Fabrication
Transport and Install
Subtotal
Subsea
Export Pipeline
Hull and M oorings
Topsides
HUC
Subtotal
Facilities Total
Total
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Planned
28.6%
100.0%
38.1%
41.2%
9.8%
35.4%
100.0%
55.2%
45.4%
12.6%
38.6%
83.5%
58.7%
17.8%
12.7%
50.5%
28.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
21.6%
Cumulative
Actual
Variance
28.3%
-0.2%
95.0%
-5.0%
40.0%
1.9%
40.0%
-1.2%
10.0%
0.2%
38.4%
3.0%
100.0%
0.0%
60.0%
4.8%
50.0%
4.6%
15.0%
2.4%
37.7%
-0.9%
85.0%
1.5%
60.0%
1.3%
15.0%
-2.8%
14.0%
1.4%
60.0%
9.5%
30.0%
1.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.1%
0.5%
Page 115 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Planned
3.3%
2.1%
3.1%
4.6%
3.1%
3.6%
0.0%
6.0%
10.0%
2.0%
6.0%
3.0%
5.6%
6.7%
1.3%
4.8%
3.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.6%
Period
Actual
3.5%
1.2%
3.6%
4.0%
3.8%
0.6%
0.0%
8.0%
12.0%
3.0%
5.5%
3.2%
5.1%
6.1%
1.6%
5.6%
4.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.4%
Variance
0.2%
-0.9%
0.5%
-0.6%
0.7%
-3.0%
0.0%
2.0%
2.0%
1.0%
-0.5%
0.2%
-0.5%
-0.6%
0.3%
0.8%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-1.2%
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix I Rebaselining
The graphics below reflect a rebaseline scenario for a scope-of-work change situation for a Delivery Area. In this
scenario, the Contractor has made provisions to increase manpower or hours or otherwise make changes to
ensure completion date is met. Not all rebaselines will result in slippage to the end date, though this is rare.
Scope-of-work Change Causing the Project to be Rebaselined
The following example indicates a worst-case scenario where a project or Delivery Area is rebaselined due to
scope growth or other schedule events. The end date has slipped significantly and either interface float is being
consumed, placing the project at risk or the critical path is being directly impacted.
Plan
Rebaseline Indicating Delay to Project
Actual
Rebaseline
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
May-07
Apr-07
Mar-07
7
r-0
ay
-0
7
M
Feb-07
ar
-0
7
-0
7
M
Fe
b
Ap
Jan-07
Nov-06
Dec-06
-0
6
Ja
n07
Oct-06
-0
6
ov
Sep-06
D
ec
-0
6
N
O
ct
Aug-06
-0
6
Se
p
Jul-06
6
g06
l-0
n06
Ju
Au
Jun-06
9.1%
3.0%
May-06
4.5%
2.0%
Apr-06
0.0%
0.0%
Ju
6
ay
-0
6
r-0
Mar-06
M
Ap
-0
6
ar
-0
6
M
Fe
b
Feb-06
Plan
Actual
Rebaseline
Jan-06
Ja
n06
0%
14.4% 21.9% 31.2% 44.7% 61.0% 72.2% 83.3% 91.1% 97.6% 99.7% 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
6.0% 12.0% 20.0% 30.0%
30.0% 46.0% 57.0% 67.0% 75.0% 82.0% 88.0% 92.0% 95.0% 98.0% 100.0%
Page 116 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix J Schedule Risk Analysis Process
The risk analysis must be independently conducted to remain objective and fair. Project Teams often have a
positively focused attitude and behavior that is essential for good project management but may not consider
routine schedule risks or significant risk events. In addition, there are often political pressures to maintain control
or pre-conceived schedule dates. Even when potential risks are acknowledged, the Project Teams’ narrow focus
often results in the magnitude of impact being underestimated.
The risk review team must fully understand and appreciate the schedule. To facilitate risk analysis, the project
must provide the Schedule Basis and Assumptions document along with pdf and native files of the Master
Control Schedule and the Level 1 Schedule to the risk review team at least one week in advance of the risk
review. It is expected that the project Planning Team will be fully involved in the risk review process to assist the
review team in understanding the basis and assumptions and to facilitate the discipline team interviews.
The process will include interviews with key team personnel, a clear understanding of the teams’ participation in
development of the control schedule, identification of key assumptions, risks as understood by the team and
listing of key risk events.
The Planning Engineer(s) must work diligently to incorporate all project team inputs in development of the MCS
and basis and assumptions. Any lack of buy in to the schedule will likely be revealed in the Schedule Risk
Review. This is avoidable when the Planning Engineer maintains full team involvement in development of the
schedule.
A common problem associated with poor risk analysis is having too many conditions and assumptions (e.g. the
analysis assumes activities will happen on a certain date). The fact that the assumption has to be made means that
there is uncertainty in the date, and, therefore, these uncertainties will be included in the analysis. Fewer
assumptions and more empirical data will generally lead to a more accurate risk analysis and provide more
predictable outcomes to the project and management teams.
The risk review will conclude with a presentation of the preliminary results to the Project Team followed by a
formal report issued approximately 1 week after the review. Risk review results are BP internal and not to be
distributed outside of BP. Results are provided to the project management team and to the Integrated Stage Gate
Review team, where a review is conducted as part of the stage gate assurance process.
Review Schedule – Technical Requirements
The schedule risk review process begins with a robust project Master Control Schedule. The MCS is used to
develop a Primavera risk model as outlined in this document. . Once the risk model is complete, it is analyzed
with the Schedule Check tool of Primavera Risk Analysis, and any alterations required are then completed. Once
the risk model meets the required level of integrity, the risk analysis process begins with the opening of the risk
schedule in the analysis software.
To initially assess the schedule sensitivity and identify main drivers, an initial risk analysis is performed using
quick-risk with wide generic three point ranges in the order of -50 / +150. A review of the criticality tornado
chart will give an indication on where to focus attention during the discussion with the Delivery Team. This will
only provide a high level view. Key risk events will still need to be mapped to the risk model in the formal
review.
Subsequently, routine risk ranges are assigned to all activities as applicable (generally around 90%/+125%
depending individual task risk assessment) and risk events created, distributions assigned, etc. before the Monte
Carlo simulation is run. Input will be required from the project team to provide the optimistic, most likely and
pessimistic durations in specific risk areas. Achieving good results require strict adherence to the following risk
model schedule guidelines.
Where understood, weather modeling should be included in the development of the risk model using the Risk
Analysis Weather Modeling feature. Weather windows may also be modeled in the risk software (ice windows,
monsoon seasons, etc.). If a weather window is deemed to be a key driver to schedule outcomes, the window
should be included as a risk event in the schedule to increase visibility in the tornado charts and other outputs.
Schedule Risk Model – Schedule Development Rules
The Master Control Schedule serves as the basis for developing a schedule risk model. The risk model is a copy
of the MCS that has been modified to fit within the development rules as laid out in this section. The
modification of the MCS into a risk model requires careful consideration as to not changing the critical path and
key dates when creating the risk model. The risk model is in essence a reflection of the MCS modified to meet
requirements of the analysis software, Primavera Risks Analysis.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 117 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Creating a robust risk model, which reflects with accuracy the contents of the MCS, is an activity that requires
careful consideration by the Planning Engineer. This is not a job to be left for the last minute ahead of the
review.
Furthermore, the Planning Engineer must ascertain that the Level 1 schedule, MCS, risk model and Schedule
Basis and Assumptions all contain consistent dates before providing the pre-read to the risk review team. It is not
unheard of for a project to provide disconnected documents, which can be very embarrassing when this only
becomes apparent at the review.
Activity Count
The number of activities should be between 50 and 150 activities (the smaller the better). Schedule Risk Analysis
is a management tool and, therefore, needs to get its message across in a straight forward and succinct manner.
Analysis of a 5,000 activity network will generally not give good results for a number of technical reasons
ranging from the strict schedule quality requirement, which tends to deteriorate with larger files, ability to gain a
correct understanding of activity criticality, applying suitable ranges to such a large set of activities or being able
to trace/find issues and activities in the risk model, etc. There are also additional requirements to correlate sets of
activities to maintain risk model integrity. This is very cumbersome and avoidable when the file is kept to a
manageable size. In essence, larger files tend to decrease the quality of the risk results rather than improve the
quality. What is of the essence is that the risk schedule file of 50 to 150 activities clearly identifies the critical
and near-critical path activities.
Relationships and Lags
Activity relationships will only have Finish-to-Start relationships and lags are to be avoided. If deemed not
possible then Start-to-Start or Finish-to-Finish relationships should be kept to the very minimum and should
never be used on the critical or near/sub-critical paths. Lags, where possible, should be replaced with an activity,
even if the activity is a ‘place holder’. As an example, where equipment delivery may be tied FF with a lag to
fabrication, this assumption should be replaced by splitting the fabrication activity into ‘start fabrication’ and
‘finish fabrication’ where the equipment delivery is tied FS to ‘finish fabrication’, and the lag and FF is
eliminated. This methodology adds clarity to and facilitates proper behaviors in the risk model.
Constraints
The plan will avoid constraints such as Must Start On, Finish on or After, Start on or After, etc. Constraints that
prevent the ‘free movement’ of activities being analyzed in the risk model will prevent realistic results. Start
constraints may be used on the first activity if there is some reason to not use the data date, but if there is some
doubt about when the project will start, then it is recommended that an activity prior to start is put into the plan
spanning the current schedule data date to the forecast start date so the uncertainty around the start date can be
included in the model. This will allow a variation in the actual start of the project to be considered in the
analysis. Close inspection will generally indicate that any schedule constraints can be replaced with a
predecessor activity. If the constraint is ‘Start On or After’, the predecessor can generally be ranged to an equal
minimum and mostly likely duration where it does not impact risk results by allowing the successor to move
forward in time.
Activities in Progress or Complete
The plan should only contain remaining duration activities. Completed activities are not required. No progress
will be shown against an activity. If an activity is underway, the progress can be eliminated by splitting and
renaming the activity to ‘complete activity X’, for example, while showing the remaining duration as total
duration. Completed or in progress activities have a tendency to be mishandled by the risk software.
Calendars
Multiple calendars in risk models are to be avoided as the software generates spurious and misleading results at
calendar interfaces. The risk model schedule should only use one calendar. 24 hour calendars are not permitted
in the risk model. Typically, a 7 day 8 hour per day calendar applied to all activities provides good results. The
Planning Engineer creating the risk model will need to ensure the MCS activity finish dates are aligned in the
risk model finish dates, even though different calendars may be applied.
Open Ends
Ideally the plan should have one start and one finish. In addition to the end date range, a key output from
Schedule Risk Analysis is activity criticality. Criticality is a measure of the probability that an activity would be
on the critical path and, therefore, influence the probabilistic end date. Multiple end dates can mask the criticality
of an activity. The influence of multiple ends on criticality must be specifically addressed during the risk review
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 118 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
to have a clear picture of the critical activities. Where multiple end dates are required, separate risk models may
need to be produced to evaluate each of the end dates on a case-by-case basis.
Risk Events
It must be stressed that to get a good result it is essential to consider all potential outcomes, hence, risk events
should be included. A review of the Project Risk Register should be used as a source of potential risk events and
built into the risk model logic linked to the appropriate activities.
The magnitude of the schedule contingency produced by the risk review depends on the unique characteristics of
the project and the risks they pose for the overall completion of the project activities.
Other risk events may include:








Logistics – project located in a remote or underdeveloped location
Weather events – hurricanes, typhoons, eddy/loop events
Labor disruptions
Governments, regulatory bodies, agencies or Partners requiring more approval or where permitting
requirements are not well defined
Requirements that are imposed due to ‘political’ reasons
Political disruptions
Government policies not established for projects
Government or local customary practices delay schedules (example: port processing and releasing of
shipments, local transport, etc.)
Once possible events have been identified, their probabilities of occurrence and the potential schedule impacts
are assessed by the schedule review team and included in the risk modeling simulations.
Schedule Risk Model Outputs
Schedule Risk Review outputs include probabilistic dates. Probabilistic dates are expressed as the percentage
likelihood that a date will be achieved (i.e. a P50 represents a 50% probability that a date will be achieved).
Primary date outputs are the P50 representing the PT (performance target) of the first production or start up and
the P90, representing the NTE (not to exceed dates) of the same. The dates generated are used to determine
schedule contingency by measuring the difference between the deterministic date (control target date), P50 and
P90. The P50 and P90 dates for first production are used as FM promise dates for the performance target and not
to exceed.
An analysis will be included in the results indicating variance from control durations expressed in both a
percentage and months. The execute variance (contingency) between the deterministic finish date and the P50 PT
finish date is expected to be 10% to 15%, and the P90 NTE should be around 30% beyond the deterministic
duration. Higher ranges may be an indicator of excessive risk being carried forward in the project and will need
to be clarified in the reporting of the results.
The risk analysis software refers to deterministic dates and durations which are the dates and durations as
represented in the risk model, derived from the Master Control Schedule. The deterministic dates and durations
are not an output from the risk model but rather an input from the MCS to the risk model, used to gauge the level
of confidence in the MCS. The risk software uses the risk model durations as the most likely durations and
ranges are set on either side of this duration in the risking process.
On occasion, the commercial function may require a P10 date for first production. This is readily available from
the review outputs.
The following is an example of a Define duration review result:
Define - Deterministic
Define- Performance Target [PT]
Define - Not to Exceed [NTE]
GPO Project Schedule
25-Feb-13
27-Feb-13
1-Apr-13
Duration
M onths
17
17
18
Variance
M onths
0
0
1
Contingency
NA
0%
7%
The following table lists actual analysis results of an Execute duration from a major project:
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 119 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
First Oil - Deterministic
First Oil - Performance Target [PT]
First Oil - Not to Exceed [NTE]
GPO Project Schedule
9-M ar-17
Duration
M onths
51
Variance
M onths
0
29-Aug-17
21-Jun-18
58
67
7
16
Contingency Rationale
NA
Benchmarks conservatively
w ith analogue projects
12%
Reflects residual risks
32%
Consistent w ith the unmitigated schedule risk
events currently present
Comparison of the above two tables clearly indicates that the greater proportion of risk lie within the Execute
stage.
Additional outputs of a risk review are tornado charts that provide key analytical metrics, which are helpful in
understanding criticality of specific tasks within a schedule. The more crucial an activity is, the more likely it is
to affect the overall outcome of the project. The following chart is an example of a review output; a tornado chart
of duration criticality:
The above activities warrant close tracking over the course of the project. Planning Engineers should look for
opportunities to expand the level of detail contained within these activities to help maintain tighter control of the
schedule and thereby mitigate the chance of slippage.
It cannot be overemphasized that Schedule Risk Analysis results are in no way meant to infer that a project’s
deterministic schedule is not achievable. A deterministic schedule that is not achievable is not an acceptable
schedule for review as there will be too much uncertainty and residual risks. Schedules that are submitted for
review which are not considered achievable by the team will have additional risks factors modeled in the
analysis. This is not a good position for a project to be when trying to progress through a stage gate.
A sound basis and assumptions document, benchmarking, incorporation of market conditions and all other
considerations will have been reflected in the Master Control Schedule prior to the risk analysis to obtain a risk
analysis result which reflects the team and management confidence in the schedule going forward.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 120 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix K IPA Schedule Definition Best Practices
The below information is provided by IPA except as noted.
End of FEL 2 (End of Select; concept definition)
General Research Findings:
The primary objective of a project schedule at the end of FEL 2 is to:






Provide a tool to facilitate the optimal planning of the project, given business and project priorities
Map out FEL 3 in detail for project controls and progress reporting
Determine the feasibility of the target completion date(s)
Flush out errors or conflicts in planning and resolve them before starting FEL 3
Determine the critical path(s) that need attention, including early procurement requirements
Provide a clear communication tool for FEL 2 gate review
Best Practices for project schedules at the end of FEL 2


















Based on a documented WBS
Includes the entire project scope
Includes all project phases
Reflects hard constraints documented in PEP
Entire project schedule based on CPM
All activities tied into the network
Clear critical path
Reasonable amounts of activity float
Detailed plan for FEL 3

BP Note 1: FEED schedules are often not prepared by time of pacesetter review due to
ongoing CTR development and inability to raise a call off to the FEED contractor until CTRs are
complete and project passes RCM at Define Gate (on funding)
Level of detail required for effective schedule monitoring and control
Includes development of FEL 3 deliverables
Detailed design activities and procurement prior to authorization

BP Note 2: These are rarely prepared by the time of the Pacesetter review and often dependent
on contract call offs provided at the Define stage gate
Project system requirements such as gate reviews, peer reviews, etc.
Planned VIPs
FEL 3 phase should be resource loaded with critical project resources – owner
 and contractor

BP Note 3: BP uses other mechanisms for planning IPT resources and does not resource load
BP schedules. See BP note 1.
Objective is to ensure that the plan for FEL 3 is feasible given resource
 availability
Document requirements for critical or scarce resources
Provide a tool for ensuring that the FEL 3 plan and FEL 3 cost estimate
 are aligned

Best Practice for Execution Phase








Network of activities tied together using predecessors and successors
Critical path is clear an continuous
Transition and overlap between design and construction modeled
Planned design and construction packages shown
Planned construction sequence including any constraints such as
 Weather window, turnarounds/shutdowns, etc.
Turnover sequence shown at high level
Appropriate startup period included to show full life-cycle
Basis of schedule document
Upstream Considerations
Upstream projects are typically larger than downstream projects and often involve several different major
components that are led by different FEED and execution contractors. As a result, at the end of FEL 2, upstream
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 121 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
projects may have different project schedules for major areas. These schedules are typically developed by
different FEED contractors or in-house teams (fab yard, drilling, quarters, construction on shore, integration
activities, installation, etc.).At the end of FEL 2, the project should have an appropriate project schedule for each
major area based on the general requirements described above. The owner team (or another FEED contractor)
would then need to integrate these plans together to form a master project schedule. This master schedule would
include any interfaces between the individual schedules. In our experience, the master schedule is not typically
resource loaded for FEL 3 activities, but the individual subcomponent schedules would be resource loaded with
critical resources. At the end of FEL 2, the team shall also have a Basis of Schedule document which outlines
the scheduling function’s staffing plan and roles and responsibilities, WBS structure, the approach to schedule
development and schedule control, coding structure of activity codes, schedule assumptions, and a discussion of
how individual project schedules will be integrated into a master schedule. Again, at the end of FEL 2, the
project team should have a clear and detailed control level schedule(s) for the FEL 3 phase that can be used for
project controls and progress measurement. In addition, the execution phase should be modeled out to show the
project’s critical path(s) and provide a sound basis and support for the overall project completion dates.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 122 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix L Fuse Metrics
Both BP and Contractor schedules must meet the following metric criteria to be deemed robust. Any exceptions
to these rules must be carefully flagged to the Lead Planning Engineer and PSTL/PSM when necessary.
BP Planning Engineers are to adopt the following provisions as best practice guidelines when both
developing schedules and interpreting/analysing Contractor schedules. Many of these metrics are also
identified in the Pertmaster Schedule Check. BP Planning Engineers will be required to understand and
implement these basic schedule rules. There will be instances in the MCS where these principles may be
waived to support the nature of the MCS where long duration activities occur, each to be assessed on an
individual basis.
Metric Criteria:
Open Ends
Description: Total number of activities that are missing a predecessor, a successor, or both. This number should
not exceed 5%.
This is a core schedule quality check. In theory, each activity should have at least one predecessor and one
successor associated with it. Failure to do so will impact the quality of results derived from a time analysis as
well as a risk analysis.
Start to start relationships are not considered as valid successor relationships as they result in open ends unless
they are tied off with a correct finish to start or finish to finish logic. Start to Start relationships should be
avoided unless it can be shown to be a truly valid relationship and not just put in place to avoid showing the
correct logic driver.
Logic Density
Description: Average number of logic links per activity.
In theory, this value should be at least two. An average of less than two indicates that the schedule may have
open ends and should be reviewed and updated with additional logic links. An upper limit of four is also
recommended as logic density above this threshold indicates overly complex logic within a schedule.
High Float
Description: Number of activities with total float greater than 2 months. This number should not exceed 5% of
the total activity count.
Schedule paths with high amounts of float typically arise due to artificially constrained activities or other much
longer competing critical paths. Paths with finish float of more than 2 months should be considered for schedule
optimization (an opportunity to add additional activities without impacting the project completion date).
Negative Float
Description: Total number of activities with total finish float of less than 0 working days.
Negative float is a result of an artificially accelerated or constrained schedule. Negative float indicates that a
schedule is not possible based on the current completion dates. Compare this metric to constraint metrics to
determine which activities (with negative float) are being impacted by constraints. Ideally, there should not be
any negative float in the schedule.
High Duration
Description: Total number of activities that have a duration longer than 2 months. This number should not
exceed 5% of the total activity count excluding procurement manufacturing, indirect management, supervisory
and assurance type activity durations. (It remains a BP preference to not include indirects and supervision in
schedules unless head count is required for Brownfield POB or bed space issues).
High duration activities are generally an indication that a plan is too high level for adequate planning and
controls. Consider further developing the schedule adding more detailed activities.
Number of Lags
Description: Total number of activities that have lags in their predecessors. This number should not exceed 5%
of total activity count.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 123 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
A lag is a duration applied to a logic link often used to represent non-working time between activities such as
concrete curing. Lags tend to hide detail in schedules and cannot be statused like normal activities. Lags should
typically be replaced with activities.
Milestone Ratio
Description: Ratio of the number of milestones to the number of normal activities. This number should not be
less than 1:20.
This is a powerful metric to reflect the number of deliverables versus the number of activities required to achieve
these deliverables. If the ratio is less than 1:20, then the plan needs to be further developed to reflect more detail
in the work (activities).
Detail Level
Description: Ratio of the number of summary activities to the number of normal activities. Should not be less
than 1:20. Summary includes hammocks and LOE activities.
This is a useful metric for determining whether or not there is enough detail in the schedule. Typically, if the
ratio is less than 1:20 then more detail is required in the plan.
Missing WBS
Description: Activities that are missing WBS values.
Activities without WBS values indicate poor planning.
Activities Riding Data Date
Description: Activities where the start date is the same as the project data date (Time Now).
This is an indication of activities that are being delayed or have not been properly statused.
Schedule Overrun
Description: Activities where the remaining duration is greater than the original duration.
This is an indication that additional work has transpired since the plan was developed or that planned work was
delayed after the actual start date. The cause of this duration increase must be thoroughly investigated and
understood by the Planning Engineer and evaluated against any impact to the critical path.
SS Predecessors
Description: Activities with Start to Start (SS) logic links.
SS links should be used with caution and when applied, should be tied off using a corresponding Finish to Finish
(FF) link. An activity with only a start to start successor is considered open ended.
SF Predecessors
Description: Activities with Start to Finish (SF) logic links.
Start-to-Finish (SF) links are deliberately used very rarely because they have the unusual effect that the successor
happens before the predecessor. This is considered a poor planning practice.
FF Predecessors
Description: Activities with Finish to Finish (FF) logic links.
Finish to Finish (FF) links should be used with caution and generally should be tied off using a corresponding
Start to Start (SS) link. FF to links should be checked for lags that might be better represented by a schedule
activity.
FS Predecessors
Description: Total number of activities with Finish to Start (FS) logic links should be at least 90% of the total
activity count.
Finish to Start (FS) links provide a logical path through the project. Finish to Start relationships are the most
common type of logic link in a schedule and are used to portray a sequential series of work where a successor
cannot start before its’ predecessor has finished. Having less than 90% of all links as FS links is a poor
scheduling practice.
Merge Hotspot
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 124 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Also known as merge bias, merge hotspot is an indication as to how complex the start of an activity is. If the
number of links is greater than two, then there is a high probability that the activity in question will be delayed
due to the cumulative effect of all links having to complete on time in order for the activity to start on time.
Diverge Hotspot
Description: Activities with a high number of successor links.
A diverge hotspot is an indication as to how complex the end of an activity is. If the number of links is greater
than two, then there is a high probability that the activity in question may delay a large number of successors.
Logic Hotspot
Description: Activities with a high number of predecessor links as well as a high number of successor links.
This is a measure of a high-risk activity. Activities with both a large number of predecessors and successors
typically turn into schedule bottlenecks causing delays. A hotspot is defined as any activity with three or more
predecessors and three or more successors.
Summary Links
Description: Summary activities that have logic links.
Summaries are groupings of activities and not true work. If logic links are attached to summaries, the project
plan cannot be re-grouped using any other field as the designator for the summary. Summaries with links should
be avoided at all costs.
Open Start
Description: Activities where the only predecessor(s) is either Finish-to-Finish or Start-to-Finish resulting in an
open end to the activity.
These are also known as ‘Dangling Activities’ and considered open ends and must be avoided.
Open Finish
Description: Activities where the only successor(s) is either Start-to-Finish or Start-to-Start resulting in an open
end to the activity.
These are also known as ‘Dangling Activities’ and considered open ends and must be avoided.
Open Ends with Constraints
Description: Activities where missing logic is accounted for through the use of a constraint.
Open ended activities that have been tied off with a constraint are more defendable than activities that are openended without associated constraints but the constraint must be justified.
Open Ends without Constraints
Description: Activities where there is missing logic without any type of supporting constraint.
These are open ended activities that have not been tied off with a constraint. This is the worst type of open ended
logic and is not permitted.
Lags
Description: Activities with lags.
Lags are positive durations or delays associated with logic links. Lags tend to hide detail in schedules and cannot
be statused like normal activities. Lags should typically be replaced with activities.
Leads
Description: Activities carrying negative lag.
This is also known as negative lag and is often used to adjust the successor start or end date relative to the logic
link applied. This can result in the successor starting before the start of the predecessor and represents poor
planning practice.
Constraints
Description: The total number of activities with a constraint of any kind applied should not exceed 5% of total
activity count.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 125 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Constraints should be avoided if possible. Constraints artificially lock down a schedule and go against the ability
for a schedule to naturally ‘flow’ during a time analysis. One-way constraints such as ‘Start No Earlier Than’ are
valid if they can be justified (e.g. contractual start date). Includes only normal activities and milestones that are
planned, in-progress, or complete.
An exception to the constraint rule is in the exchange of interface information where logic links may not exist
and interface activities will be constrained or where resource constraints exists and the constraints are used for
these purposes only.
Soft Constraints
Description: Number of activities with soft or one-way constraints.
Soft or one-way constraints such as Start no Earlier Than or Finish No Later Than constrain an activity in a
single direction. While not as impactful as hard constraints, soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a
schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Hard Constraints
Description: Number of activities with hard or two-way constraints.
Hard or two-way constraints such as Must Start On or Must Finish On should be avoided. Consider using soft
constraints if absolutely necessary.
As Late As Possible
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to start as late as possible without
impacting the Early or Late dates.
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as impactful as hard
constraints, soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Additionally, this constraint can set early dates equal to late dates and should therefore be avoided as this
presents a significant risk to the activity completion.
Finish On or After
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to finish on or after a specific date
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard constraints,
soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Finish On or Before
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to finish on or before a specific
date
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard constraints,
soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Must Finish On
Description: Activities with a hard (two-way) constraint that forces the activity to finish on a specific date but
does not override CPM Calculations.
Remarks: Hard or two-way constraints such as this should be avoided. Consider using soft constraints if
absolutely necessary. Includes only normal activities and milestones that are planned, in-progress, or complete.
Mandatory Finish
Description: Activities with a hard (two-way) constraint that forces the activity to finish on a specific date,
overriding CPM calculations.
This hard (two-way) activity constraint completely overrides CPM calculations and breaks the schedule into two
parts. Hard or two-way constraints such as this should be avoided. Consider using soft constraints if absolutely
necessary.
Must Start On
Description: Activities with a hard (two-way) constraint that forces the activity to start on a specific date but
does not override CPM Calculations.
Hard or two-way constraints such as this should be avoided. Consider using soft constraints if absolutely
necessary.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 126 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Mandatory Start
Description: Activities with a hard (two-way) constraint that forces the activity to start on a specific date,
overriding CPM calculations.
This hard (two-way) activity constraint completely overrides CPM calculations and breaks the schedule into two
parts. Hard or two-way constraints such as this should be avoided. Consider using soft constraints if absolutely
necessary.
Start and Finish
Description: Activities with a hard (two-way) constraint that forces the activity to start and finish on specific
dates. (Also known as ‘Must Start and Finish’)
This hard (two-way) activity constraint removes float from the activity. Hard or two-way constraints such as this
should be avoided. Consider using soft constraints if absolutely necessary.
Start On or After
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to start on or after a given date.
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard constraints,
soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Start On or Before
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to start on or before a given date.
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard constraints,
soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Late Constraints
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to start or finish on or before a
given date.
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard constraints,
soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 127 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Early Constraints
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to start or finish on or after a
given date.
Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard constraints,
soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Zero Free Float Constraints
Description: Activities with a soft (one-way) constraint that forces the activity to finish as late as possible
without impacting the network path dates. (Also known as a Late as Possible Constraint)
Remarks: Soft or one-way constraints such as this fix an activity in a single direction. While not as bad as hard
constraints, soft constraints do impact CPM calculations in a schedule and should be reviewed carefully.
Total Float Constraints
Description: Activities with both a mandatory start and finish constraint applied.
This hard (two-way) activity constraint, in effect, locks the activity overriding the natural total float calculation.
Hard or two-way constraints such as this should be avoided. Consider using soft constraints if absolutely
necessary.
0 to 20 Days Float
Description: Activities with positive float ranging from less than or equal to 20 days.
Near-critical activities should be closely monitored during execution to ensure on-time project.
20 to 30 Days Float
Description: Activities with positive float of more than 20 days and less than or equal to 30 days.
Mid-range float activities should be monitored periodically to ensure these activities aren’t trending towards
critical.
More than 30 Days Float
Description: Activities with positive float more than or equal to 30 days.
Large float activities typically pose low risk exposure to a project. These activity paths (or sequences) are good
candidates for adding additional concurrent work to the schedule to help with project acceleration.
Average Float
Description: Total finish float for a grouping.
This is a good indication as to whether there is scope for improvement in the selected grouping.
Float Ratio
Description: A calculation of the average float divided by the average remaining duration.
This is a useful metric in determining how much float exists relative to the amount of work within an activity.
The higher the ratio, the more float per day of activity duration.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 128 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix M Fast Track Projects
The following diagram reflects a general timeline for a large Major Project in a fast track environment and
indicates how the scheduling requirements rapidly increase from a conceptual level schedule to the Define and
Execute schedules. The timeline also depicts the governance and assurance process typically associated with a
Major Project. The level of effort required preparing for the stage gate review and subsequent funding of
possibly billions of dollars cannot be underestimated.
Note how the fast track nature creates the likelihood of beginning Execute activities during Define with a multi
Delivery Area project. IPA FEL stages are also indicated on this graphic.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 129 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Typical Large Project w ith multiple Delivery Areas (DA)
SELECT
DEFINE
Define Stage
Gate
Approval
Concept Select
DM Decision
M emorandum
EXECUTE
Execute Stage
Gate Approval
DA 1 FEED
DA 1 Det . Engineering
DA 1 Long Lead Procurement
DA 1 Fabricat ion, T& I
Development of
the schedules for
the various concept
options under
consideration
Development of the Schedule
Basis and Assumptions and the
Master Control Schedule for the
Selected Option
DA 2 FEED
DA 2 Det ailed Engineering
DA 2 Long Lead Procurement
DA 2 Fabricat ion, T& I
DA 3 FEED
DA 3 Det ailed Engineering
Concept Select
Determining right concept for
project - best capital
efficiency, meets technical,
HSSE and Schedule
requirements
Concept Definit ion
Governance
Determining sufficient
BP/Contractor
technical definition to
completion of Define
refine cost and
Stage CTRS,
schedule data,
development of level 3
understand risks and
resource loaded
preparation for the
schedules, level 2
Define Stage Gate
execute schedules,
Assurance and
complete update and
Governance processes. set baseline for M aster
Develop estimate, M CS Control Schedule and
and Risk M odel
Control Budget
FEL 2
IPA, Independent Project Analysis Front End Loading St ages
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
DA 3 Fab, T& I
EDR/PHSSER
Cost and Schedule Risk Review
IPA Review (if required)
Integrated Stage Gate Review
PRM Project Review M eeting
UEM , RPM , RCM if require
The level of effort
required t o prepare
for a Define St age
Gat e review cycle
should not be
underst at ed
EDR/PHSSER
Cost and Schedule Risk Review
IPA Review
Integrated Stage Gate Review
PRM Project Review M eeting
UEM or Resource Planning M eeting
Resource Committee M eeting
DA 3 Long Lead Procurement
Define
Governance
Execut e
CVP and Planning Phases in a Fast
Track Environm ent :
Detailed Engineering begins in Define
• Long Lead Procurement begins in
Define or in extreme cases during
concept definition (fungibles)
• Governance process is similar to
Define Gate
FEL 3
Page 130 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev: B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Appendix N Abbreviations and Definitions
Abbreviations and Definitions
Abbreviation
Meaning
AFC
Approved for Construction
AP
Activity Planning- Operations and maintenance site specific detailed planning support
group
Baseline
An approved plan for a project, plus or minus approved changes. It is compared to actual
performance to determine if performance is within acceptable variance thresholds.
Generally refers to the current baseline, but may refer to the original or some other
baseline.
BP Project
Specific Schedule
WBS
A schedule WBS suitable for a specific type of project with its basis in the BP Standard
WBS. The schedule WBS must be easily mapped to the Standard WBS while facilitating
the schedule roll up requirements and not introducing redundancy into schedule layouts.
BP Standard WBS
A structured framework / breakout based on the project design basis and work to be
performed on the project; the standard WBS provides logical and manageable groups or
compartments against which to structure cost and schedule information.
BRISK
Business Risk – Often used to refer to the software/process used in determining project
UAP and AUAP
CoP
Community of Practice
Critical Path
The continuous chain of activities running from the start event to the finish event in the
logic network that drives the overall project end date. Activities on the critical path have
zero float.
CSVR
Cost and Schedule Verification Review
CTR
Cost Time Resource. A CTR is a defined scope of work that can be fully described,
scheduled, priced and resources allocated. Each CTR has ‘inputs’ (such as a planned start
date and duration, preceding activities, resources needed, etc.) and ‘outputs’ such as
succeeding activities and deliverables resulting from performing the CTR.
CVP
Capital Value Process – Stage Gates Project Appraise, Select, Define, Execute and Operate
Dashboard
Dashboards are used as summary outputs of BP Internal Reviews (Discipline Reviews or
ISGR for example). Dashboards may also refer to summary reports as prepared by BP or
Contractors
Deliverable
A Deliverable may be a fully assembled and tested item of equipment, a unit of material, a
document or drawing that is individually tracked as part of the overall plan. Each
deliverable has a unique identifier, description (or title), planned start and finish date and a
‘value’ (either in money or man-hours or unit quantity of measure).
Deterministic
Duration or Date calculated by Primavera and equivalent to planned or forecast date,
generally used as control dates.
DM
Decision Memorandum – Required during Select for approval of the selected concept
Earned Value
Management
A management methodology for integrating scope, schedule, and resources, and for
objectively measuring project performance and progress. Performance is measured by
determining the budgeted cost of work performed (i.e. earned value) and comparing it to
the actual cost of work performed (i.e. actual cost).
EDR
Engineering Discipline Review
EPC
Engineering, Procurement, Construction
EPCC
Engineering, Procurement, Construction, Commissioning
EPCI
Engineering, Procurement, Construction, Installation
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 131 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev:B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
EPS
Enterprise Project Structure
EPMS
Engineering, Procurement, and Management Service
FEED
Front End Engineering and Design
Float Remaining
Total of how many days float remain in a project. Often included in float run down
trending
Float – Total
Measure of how many days an activity can slip its planned start date or exceed its target
duration without impacting the overall project end date.
FM
Financial Memorandum – Signed and issue signals passage through stage gate
FTE
Full Time Equivalent
GSH
Global Subsea Hardware
GOO
Global Operations Organization
GPO
Global Operations Organization
HLV
Heavy Lift Vessel
IHUC
Installation, Hook Up and Commissioning
IFC
Issued for Construction
IFD
Issued for Design
Interface
Milestones
Interface Milestones represent the hand over from one Contractor to anther and are often
written into contracts. These need to be recorded in the MCS to allow for monitoring.
ISGR
Integrate Stage Gate Review
IPA Independent
Project Analysis
Inc.
An independent benchmarking firm offering services to assist Project Teams in comparing
their project proposals against industry norms, at appropriate point in a project life cycle.
IPA performs external benchmarking and FEL assessments for BP’s UPSTREAM GPO
Projects.
LTP
Long Term Plan – Generally relates to a regional business plan
Manpower
Histogram
A Manpower Histogram includes the period and cumulative planned and actual equivalent
manpower working on the project for the duration of the scope.
Master Control
Schedule (MCS)
An overall plan that summarizes the individual Contractor’s sub-networks to ensure the
total project is monitored. The MCS is typically fed by key dates from sub-networks and
shows all key interfaces and milestones for the transfer of data and materials between
Contractors. The level of detail should be the minimum required for the nature of the
project.
Master Document
Register
The Master Document Register is a listing of all the deliverables that are produced by a
Contractor. MDRs typically include progress step dates and are rolled up into the
engineering schedules.
MC
Mechanical Completion
MDR
Master Document Register – Listing of all of the deliverables that are produced by the
contractor MDRs typically includes progress step dates and are rolled up into the
engineering schedules.
MOC
Management of Change
MPcp
Major Project Common Process
NTE – Not to
Exceed Date
Determine by risk analysis, is generally the first production or completion data associated
with the P90 result of the analysis
OBO
Operated By Others
OIM
Offshore Installation Manager
OSM
Offshore Safety Manager
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 132 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev:B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
PHSSER
Project Health Safety Security Environment Review
Physical
Percentage
The Physical Percentage is the amount of an activity that has been completed. For
example, you have painted 2 walls in a 4 wall room would give 50%. This should not be
confused with duration percentage which is how long it has taken or cost percentage which
is how much has been spend.
Planning Levels
The Planning Levels relate to the amount of detail contained in a plan. Level 1 is a highlevel management plan with Level 5 being the most granulated which would represent
activities of less than a day.
PMBOK
Project Management Body of Knowledge
PMOC
Project Management of Change
PO
Purchase order
Primavera
Enterprise – P6
Primavera Enterprise – P6 is the version of the planning tool that BP currently uses to
record and report all planning information.
Progress Envelope
A Progress Envelope is the area, i.e., the variance which represents the total float as it
expands and contracts through the project life cycle between the early S curve and the late
S curve. It is calculated from the early and late dates.
Project
For the purpose of this document, “Projects” is used interchangeably for Category A and
Category B projects
Project Reporting
Calendar
A Project Reporting Calendar is used to communicate between all Planning Engineers the
weekly and monthly cut-off dates and the reporting deadlines.
PSCM
Procurement and Supply Chain Management
PSG
Project Services Guideline
PSP
GPO Planning and Scheduling Procedure
PSPC
Project Staff Planning and Control Database
PT Performance
Target
Determine by risk analysis, is generally the first production or completion data associated
with the P50 result of the analysis
RAM
Resource Approval Memorandum
RCM
Resource Commitment Meeting
RFQ
Request for Quotation
ROS
Required Onsite Date – refers to equipment deliveries to construction, fabrication or
offshore sites
RPM
Resource Planning Meeting
Rules of Credit
Rules of Credit are the process whereby common activities in the schedule are allocated a
set amount of progress for each step towards completing the activity. For example, when
producing documents 10% is for starting, 60% issued for review, 75% comments returned,
100% issued for use.
RUSM
Reservoir Uncertainty Statement and Management
Schedule Basis
A Schedule Basis is a document that details what has been included in the schedule,
assumptions which have been made to create the schedule and how robust the schedule is.
Schedule
Hierarchy
See schedule level
Simops
Simultaneous Operations
Skyline of
Deliverables
A Skyline is a graphical output that counts the number of deliverables due each period and
plots them on a horizontal axis to give a plot that looks like a view across a city. The
shading of the deliverables can be used to convey the timeliness of them.
SPMR
Standard Project Monthly Report
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 133 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev:B01
BP Internal
Planning and Scheduling Procedure
Supplemental FM
A Supplement FM is an internal BP process used to request additional time and /or money
to complete a project by CVP stage.
SURF
Subsea, Umbilicals, Risers and Flowlines
UAP Unallocated
Provision
An allowance for goods and services which at the current state of the project definition
cannot be accurately quantified, due to uncertainty in the scope and estimating norms
included in the estimate basis, but which history and experience show will be necessary to
achieve the objectives (cost, time and quality) of the project.
UEM
Upstream Executive Meeting
WBS
Work Breakdown Structure
WBS Data
Dictionary
A WBS Data Dictionary is used to document the coding structure that has been used to
build the project WBS. Additional WBS node specific information can be added to reflect
where the plan update comes from and what progress methodology is being used.
GPO-PC-PRO-00025
© BP p.l.c.
Page 134 of 134
Uncontrolled when printed or stored locally
Rev:B01
BP Internal