Engineering Procedure
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
17 March 2013
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards
Table of Contents
1
Scope……………………………………………... 2
2
Purpose…………………………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………………… 2
4
Applicable Documents………………………….. 3
5
Definitions………………………………………… 3
6
Violations Definitions……………………………. 4
7
Instructions……………………………………….. 5
8
Responsibilities………………………………….. 8
9
Cancelled Quality Notifications……………….. 10
Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process…… 11
Appendix B - Contractor’s Internal NCR……………. 12
Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…….. 13
Appendix D - Examples of Violations
and Escalation Steps………………... 14
Appendix E - Responsibilities
for Quality Issue Notification………... 16
Appendix F - Index…………………………...………. 17
Previous Issue: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-3-8801772
Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
1
2
Scope
1.1
This Procedure establishes instructions for escalation of unresolved quality issues
in Saudi Aramco projects including delinquent quality concern notifications.
1.2
This SAEP does not apply to:
Escalation of non-conformities identified by Operation Inspection Division
(OID) during assessments of Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in operating
facilities.
●
Deficiencies noted during internal assessments by the Inspection Department.
●
Deficiencies noted during Health Checks conducted by APMID for Asset
Performance Management (APM).
Purpose
2.1
2.2
3
●
The purpose of this SAEP is to:
2.1.1
Implement a consistent method for escalating quality issues including
Logbook Entries (LBEs), Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs),
Worksheets (WSs) and Delinquent Worksheets (DWSs), as defined in
Appendix A, “Quality Issues Reporting Process.”
2.1.2
Clearly define the corporate process for project quality issue escalation
including its documentation, requirements and definition of violation
categories, systems and procedures.
2.1.3
Ensure roles and responsibilities for project quality issue escalation are
well defined and auditable.
The intent of quality issue notification is to report and record quality or technical
deficiencies, determine the root cause of the problem, record the actions taken to
correct non-conformities, avoid recurrence and enhance overall project quality.
Conflicts and Deviations
3.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing
through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee (IESC).
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Manager,
Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
4
Applicable Documents
The applicable requirements in the latest edition of the following Saudi Aramco
Engineering Procedures, Schedule “Q” and General Instructions (GIs) shall be
considered an integral part of this procedure.
 Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured
Materials and Equipment
 Contract Schedule “Q”
Quality Requirements
 Saudi Aramco General Instruction
5
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of
Facilities
Definitions
ACD: Agreed Completion Date
APM: Asset Performance Management
APMID: Asset Performance Management Integration Division
DWS: DELINQUENT WORKSHEET - Mechanism to escalate unresolved Worksheets
CQP: Contractor Quality Personnel
CQR: Contractor Quality Representative
INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor)
LBE: Logbook Entries (First level of reporting quality deficiency using Manual
Logbook or the Quality Management Information System, QMIS)
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
MCC: Mechanical Completion Certificate
MPCS: Mechanical Performance and Close-out System
MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Non-Conformities Escalation: A structured mechanism to progressively escalate
pending quality and technical deficiencies to the concerned management.
NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM).
Project Quality Manager (PQM): The Senior Inspection Representative responsible
for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of Inspection Department with
SAPMT throughout all project phases, from Project Proposal up to Mechanical
completion.
QMIS: Quality Management Information System (also known as electronic Inspection
Logbook).
Repeat Violation: A non-compliance of the same MSAER, project specifications or
standard drawings in the same activity area, that occurred more than once within
six (6) months.
SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SAP QM: Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing-Quality Module
Technical Deficiencies: Non-compliance to any MSAER or project specifications
Worksheet: Mechanism for reporting major violations or escalating pending valid
NCRs as stipulated in this Procedure.
6
Violations Definitions
MAJOR (If any one of the following applies)
1)
Violations of company standards including GIs that put the quality and integrity of
the facility including its workers and equipment at risk.
2)
Actions that violate the Corporate values by submitting forged items & counterfeit
materials.
MODERATE (If any one of the following applies)
1)
Any violation to MSAER, project specifications and approved IFC drawings that if
the next phase of work (critical path) is continued without correcting the violation,
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
the structural integrity of the next phase will be jeopardized. Such violation if not
corrected in a timely manner will lead to more severe damage or complexity.
2)
Any violation to Schedule Q.
Commentary Note:
Minor violations related to Schedule Q listed in Appendix D are excluded from this
definition.
3)
If the violation will be categorized ‘YES’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during
the partial MCC stage.
MINOR (If any one of the following applies)
7
1)
Any violation to SAES, SAMSS, project specifications and approved IFC drawings
but the next phase of work is not dependent on the correction of the violation.
2)
If the violation will be categorized as ‘NO’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during
the partial MCC stage.
Instructions
7.1
Quality Issues Notification
7.1.1
Quality or technical deficiencies shall be reported in a timely manner
through QMIS for LBE, or SAP QM (NCR or WS) depending on the
identified violation as defined in Section 6.
7.1.2
Potential non-conforming materials, products or work shall be proactively highlighted through the QMIS to avoid re-work.
7.1.3
A letter of concern signed by the PID Superintendent shall be addressed
to the Department Head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever
MCC/PMCCs are approved in the MPCS without ID signature due to
converted and unresolved ‘YES’ items for other Organizations.
This letter shall be copied to ID and PMT Department Managers.
7.1.4
A letter of concern signed by the ID Manager shall also be addressed to
the Manager of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever MCC/PMCCs are
approved in the MPCS system and ID’s ‘YES’ items are converted to
‘NO’ without obtaining ID’s agreement. This letter shall be copied to
Proponent VP, ES VP and PM VP.
7.1.5
A letter of concern signed by the ES Chief Engineer shall be addressed
to the Admin Area head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever a
Facility is commissioned without Inspection Department’s
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
review/signature on the MCC/PMCC. This letter shall be copied to
Internal Auditing, ES VP and PM VP.
7.2
7.1.6
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco
Engineering Requirement (MSAER), without securing the required
waiver approved by applicable management level authority shall be
issued a Worksheet.
7.1.7
Initiators, approvers and other interested parties of quality issue
notifications shall be in accordance with Appendix E, “Table of
Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification.”
7.1.8
Third Delinquent Worksheet (DWS3) shall be copied to Internal
Auditing for their follow-up action.
Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets
7.2.1
PID PQM, SAPMT Senior Project Engineer or Lead Project Engineer and
the Contractor Quality Representative are responsible for determining the
initial Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets.
7.2.2
When no agreement on the ACD of any type/category of Quality
Notification could be reached, the ACD shall be decided mutually by the
next level of authority from ID and PMT, depending on the Quality
Notification category.
7.2.3
If an extension of ACD is justified and mutually agreed by ID & PMT
representatives, one-time basis approval of ACD extension is allowed.
If no agreement of the new ACD is reached by the ID and PMT initiators
and approvers, the ACD shall be established by the next higher signature
level(s) per the below matrix.
Quality Notification Type
ID Rep
PMT Rep
Contractor’s Internal NCR
ID Field Supvr
PMT Project Engineer
Logbook Entry (LBE)
ID Field Supvr
PMT Project Engineer
NCR
ID Unit Supervisor
PMT Sr. Project
Engineer
Worksheet
ID PQM
PMT Project Manager
In case a conflict on establishing the ACD continues, the PMT Department
Manager shall make the final decision.
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
7.3
7.4
7.5
Handling of Contractor’s Internal NCR
7.3.1
Saudi Aramco strongly encourages all Contractors to take advantage of
all opportunities to enhance their quality management system
implementation and to fully utilize their internal QA/QC system towards
a high project quality delivery.
7.3.2
ID shall initiate escalation if a Contractor does not act to correct
quality/technical non compliances within the mutually agreed ACD.
7.3.3
To encourage Contractors’ QC Team to implement their internal quality
management system effectively, the Contractors’ recommended
completion date shall be accepted, unless found unreasonable by PMT
project engineer and the ID Field Supervisor.
7.3.4
When the Contractor’s QC personnel report and document a quality
non-compliance, ID shall follow the work process per Appendix B,
“Contractor’s Internal NCR.”
7.3.5
When an Internal NCR has been issued by the Contractor’s QC, Saudi
Aramco quality notification shall be recorded by PID in the “General
Comments” category of the QMIS, for the purpose of Lessons Learned
collection. The QMIS entry shall be closed when the internal NCR is
completed or when escalated to SA NCR due to non-compliance within
the ACD.
Clarifications to Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps”
7.4.1
Clearance of “Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or
Contractor QC Manager" in Appendix D shall be based on actual
mobilization at the project site of the approved Contractor QA Manager
or QC Manager and not just submission or approval of resumes’.
Absence of an already approved and mobilized Contractor QA/QC
Manager, due to verified emergency leave could be exempted by the
PQM provided that the leave of absence shall not be more than seven (7)
calendar days without an approved replacement.
7.4.2
Clearance of – “Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency > 10% of Plan)”
in Appendix D shall also be based on actual mobilization of the approved
Contractor QC personnel at the project site, and not just submission or
approval of resumes’.
Non-Conformities Escalation Process
7.5.1
Escalation processes shall be in accordance with Appendix C, “Quality
Issues Escalation Matrix”.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
7.5.2
Logbook Entries (LBEs) shall be made for deficiencies defined as
Minor.
LBEs shall be made through the QMIS or Manual logbook. (Manual
logbook entry shall be done only in exceptional cases and shall have
prior approval by the relevant Division Head.
7.5.3
Repeat of Moderate or Major violation within six (6) months will result
to a Quality Notification starting at the next higher level of Violation
Category and Notification. Repeat of a Minor violation due to
negligence shall be considered as Moderate violation.
7.5.4
Repeated Internal Non-Conformance Report (INCR) within six (6)
months shall be, as in Appendix B, “Contractor’s Internal NCR”:
7.5.5
8
7.5.4.1
Escalated to SA NCR if the Contractor failed to Report the
Repeated INCR
7.5.4.2
Escalated to Violation-after-the-fact Entry in the QMIS if the
contractor has detected and reported the Repeated INCR
Valid NCR shall be escalated to a Worksheet (WS) when any of the
following applies:
7.5.5.1
Valid NCR is not corrected or completed on the ACD
(including the extension period, if extension is approved)
7.5.5.2
Valid NCR issued by Inspection Department is not approved
by SAPMT within five (5) working days
7.5.6
A Worksheet that was not resolved on or before the ACD, including the
approved extension period (if extension is approved), shall be escalated
to Delinquent Worksheet, after discussing and notifying the relevant
PMT representative.
7.5.7
Once the project reaches its MCC stage, all open LBEs, NCRs,
Worksheets and DWS shall be transferred to MPCS. Items required for
start-up or impacting safety are to be marked as ‘YES’ Items. All other
items shall be designated as ‘No’ Items.
Responsibilities
8.1
Project Inspection Division Head
8.1.1
Reviews and approves or rejects PMT request to extend ACD for
Worksheets
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.1.2
Approves Worksheets issued by the PQM/Sr. Supervisor
8.1.3
Initiates issuance of Delinquent Worksheet (DWS1)
8.1.4
Reviews and approves or rejects the deletion of SAP notifications
Project Quality Manager (PQM) or Senior Supervisor
8.2.1
PQM may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) in lieu
of Field Supervisor
8.2.2
Initiates issuance of Worksheet (WS)
8.2.3
Reviews and may grant one-time approval of ACD extension prior to
escalation of valid NCR
8.2.4
Decides cases of violations not clearly defined in Section 6 and not listed
in Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps”
8.2.5
Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP,
GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and
GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of
Facilities”
Project Inspector or Field Supervisor
8.3.1
Highlights to SAPMT any potential non-conforming material, product or
work through the QMIS to avoid re-work.
8.3.2
Reports in a timely manner any quality or technical deficiency through
the QMIS or SAP QM (LBE or NCR) depending on the committed
violations as defined in Section 6 and categorized in Appendix C,
“Quality Issues Escalation Matrix”
8.3.3
Field Supervisor may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports
(NCRs) in lieu of Project Quality Manager (PQM)
SAPMT
8.4.1
Ensures project full compliance with SAEP-302, “Instructions for
Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering
Requirement”
8.4.2
Approves valid NCRs initiated by Inspection Department within five (5)
working days
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
8.4.3
9
Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP,
GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and
GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of
Facilities”
Cancelled Quality Notifications
Submitted quality notifications in SAP QM shall not be marked for deletion without
proper justification approved by PID Division Head. The approved justification shall
be attached in the quality notification being “marked for deletion”.
28 January 2012
17 March 2013
Revision Summary
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Minor revision to provide clarification on selected sections.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR
Contractor’s INCR
Moderate
Or
Major
Violation?
PID to Initially record
INCR in the General
Comments of QMIS,
marked as “For Info”
Repeat Minor
INCR?
w/in 6 months
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Repeat INCR?
w/in 6 Months
One-time
extension
granted?
No
Reported by
Contractor?
Completed
on Extension
Date?
No
Completed on
ACD?
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Change QMIS entry
to “Violation-after-the
fact”
Completed on
ACD?
Yes
No
One-time
extension
granted?
Yes
Completed on
Extension date?
Yes
No
No
Escalate INCR into
SA-NCR, then
Close INCR & QMIS
Follow the
Quality Issue
Reporting
Process
Close INCR & QMIS
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix
ESCALATION STAGES
2
3
4
Violation
Type
1st
Notification
Minor
LBE
NCR
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
Moderate
NCR
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
-
Major
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
-
-
1
5
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix D - Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps
ESCALATION MATRIX
S/N
Sample Violation
Recommended Phase for
Proactive Notification
Violation Category
1.
Forged Quality Documents
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC
Meetings
Major
2.
Procurement and/or Installation of counterfeit materials
classified as inspectable per SAEP-1151
Note: For non-inspectable materials, PQM decides on
the initial Violation Category
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC
Meetings
Major
3.
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory
Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER),
without securing the required waiver approved by
applicable management level authority.
Job X/Kick-off Meetings
Major
4.
Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or
Contractor QC Manager
Job X/Kick-off Meetings/
Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
5.
Commencing of Special Process activity as specified in
Schedule Q without approved procedures/personnel
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC
Meetings
Moderate
6.
Concrete or Asphalt placement without pre-approval of
the batching plant or mix design
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
QC meetings
Moderate
7.
Use of non-approved third party service providers
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
QC meetings
Moderate
8.
Starting work without IFC Drawings or not submitting
required Quality Documents as per Schedule “Q”
Note: Categorization is PQM discretion
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
QC meetings
Moderate
Minor
9.
Placing RVL/Inspectable materials and equipment
with unapproved source
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
QC meetings
Moderate
10.
Carrying out modification work on accepted systems
(PROCESS-RELATED) without SA approval
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
QC meetings
Moderate
11.
Preservation and Storage of equipment and materials
classified as ‘Inspectable’ per SAEP-1151 that are not
in accordance with the approved quality plan and
schedule “Q”
Note: Categorization is PQM Discretion
Kick off Meetings/Weekly
QC meetings
Moderate
Minor
12.
Contractor’s Internal NCR not resolved at the approved
completion date
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
13.
Failure of the Contractor to control and implement the
quality requirements of its batch plants, subcontractors
and other service providers as required per Schedule
Q. (e.g., Not assigning his own QC inspectors at the
manufacturer and service provider locations per
Schedule Q, and relying only on the In-House QC)
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
14.
Contractor failure to conduct complete quality system
audits per Schedule Q requirements
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
ESCALATION MATRIX
Recommended Phase for
Proactive Notification
Violation Category
15.
Contractor failure to conduct the 6-months
Management Review Meetings and submit the
results/recommendations to Saudi Aramco at the
prescribed time
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
16.
Insufficient QC Manpower
(Deficiency > 10% of Plan)
Job X / Kick-off Meetings/
Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
17.
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per
approved ITP without adequate notification or
justification (HOLD POINT activities)
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
18.
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per
approved ITP without adequate notification or
justification (Witness Point activities)
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Minor
19.
QC Personnel on part time basis, either routinely
performing non-QC functions or covering QC jobs in a
different geographical location without prior approval of
the ID Area Field Supervisor
Job X / Kick-off / Weekly
QC Meetings
Minor
20.
Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency < 10% of Plan)
Job X / Kick-off Meetings
Minor
21.
Failure to submit, incomplete, poor quality or late
submittal of the required weekly or monthly
deliverables as required by Schedule Q
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Minor
22.
Poor or incomplete quality submittals or
documentations
Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as
MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as
hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Minor
23.
Poor, late or incomplete submission of the required
weekly or monthly deliverables/documentations as
required by Schedule Q
Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as
MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such
as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Minor
24.
Failure to submit the required weekly or monthly
deliverables/documentations as required by Schedule
Q
Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as
MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such
as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings /
Weekly QC meetings
Minor
S/N
Sample Violation
Legend:
L = e-Log Book entry
N = Non-Conformance Report (Q8 Notification)
W = Worksheet (Q9 Notification)
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix E - Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification
Responsible
NCR
Initiator / Issuer
Approver
 Field Supervisor/
PQM
 Project Engineer /
Sr. Project
Engineer
Recipient /
Addressed To
 PM
Representative
Interested/Copied Parties
 Division Head, PID
 Division Head, PM
 Project Manager
 Proponent Site Rep.
Worksheet
 PQM/ID Sr.
Supervisor
 Division Head, PID
 Department
Manager, PM
 General Manager, PM
 Sr. Project Engineer
 Department Manager, ID
 Division Head, PM
 Proponent Site Rep.
DWS1
 PID Division
Head
 Department
Manager, ID
 General Manager,
PM
 Vice President, PM
 Vice President, ES
 Chief Engineer
 Project Manager
 Dept. Managers, PMT &
Proponent
DWS2
 ID Manager
 Chief Engineer
 Vice President,
PM
 Vice President, ES
 General Manager, PM
 General Auditor
 Dept. Managers, PMT &
Proponent
 PID Division Head
DWS3
 Chief Engineer
 Vice President, ES
 Sr. Vice
President, E&PM
 Vice President, PM
 General Manager, PMT
 General Auditor
 Project Manager
 ID Manager
 Dept. Managers, PMT &
Proponent
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
SAEP-381
Issue Date: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix F - Index
1
Scope………………………………………………………………………..…………… 2
2
Purpose……………………………………………………..…………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………………..……………………………………… 2
4
Applicable Documents……………………………………………………………..…… 3
5
Definitions……………………………………………………………………...………… 3
6
Violations Definitions…………………………………………………………………… 4
7
Instructions……………………………………………………….……………………… 5
8
Responsibilities…………………………………………….…………………………… 8
9
Cancelled Quality Notifications………………….…………………………………… 10
Appendix A – Quality Issues Reporting Process………………………………………... 11
Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR………………………………………………… 12
Appendix C – Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…………………………………………. 13
Appendix D – Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps……………….……….…. 14
Appendix E –Responsibilities For Quality Issue Notification……………….……….…. 16
Appendix F – Index………………………………………………………………………… 17
Page 17 of 17