Asset Performance Management Assessment | Definition | Scope | Objective | Introduction

This article is to document findings, recommendations and conclusions on the feasibility of utilizing a service provider instead of in-house team on performing Asset Performance Management Assessment (APMA). The APMA was piloted on the Safaniyah Utility Plant and awarded to a service provider (Intertek Moody). The APMA was scoped to be a detailed and focused program to improve assets efficiency, enhance performance and assure safety, integrity and reliability of the Safaniyah utility plant. It was expected from the service provider to provide a detailed integrity & reliability review of all the assets in the plant and develop action plans to ensure safe and reliable operations of the Plant. The service provider shall cover multiple technical disciplines and utilize a competent multidisciplinary team to review the plant work processes (systems and procedures) and the current health of all static, rotating, electrical, instrumentation and process control equipment/assets. In addition to that, the APMA shall identify and highlight hidden/potential failures and system gaps that need to be bridged to prevent occurrence/re-occurrence.

Asset Performance Management Assessment | Definition | Scope | Objective | Introduction

The APMA was performed by a team of rotating equipment, fixed equipment, process, electrical, and controls specialists from Intertek Moody. The team performed site walkthrough, reviewed available documentation, and conducted interviews with management, engineering, operations, maintenance, inspection, reliability, and controls personnel with the Safaniyah organization. A total of 25 recommendations were addressed covering the identified gaps. The implementation of the identified recommendations will enhance the integrity and performance of the Safaniyah Utility Plant.

2 Pilot Assessment Scope

The assessment included all equipment within the Utility Plant in Safaniyah as agreed with the proponent who showed interest to identify reliability and integrity issues within this plant which is considered critical for the Safaniyah plant operation.

3 Pilot Assessment Objective

The main objectives of piloting the out sourcing of the assessment to a service provider are:
 To examine the local content capability and approve vendors to perform Asset Performance Management Assessments due to support AIMD in the huge number of request to perform APMA.
 To examine new best practices in industry in Asset Performance Management Assessment to continuously improve the assessments process.

4 Team Members

The service provider,(Moody-Intertek), hired to conduct an APMA at the Utility Plant in Safaniyah completed the first phase of the job on Dec 16th ,2012 by delivering a presentation to Safaniyah management team including general findings and preliminary recommendations. Below are observations/comments on the service provider capabilities.

The team for the data gathering was formed by six people covering the following disciplines:
a) Risk Management (Team Leader)
b) Maintenance/Rotating Equipment/Reliability
c) Inspection & Corrosion
d) Process
e) Electrical
f) Instrumentation
The team members for the data analysis included 8 people.

5 Methodology of the Assessment

5.1 The contractor has extensive checklists covering various disciplines that have been systematically followed. They worked out the checklists through conducting site inspections, reviewing some data and conducting interviews with different individuals. The checklist is attached in Appendix 1.
5.1 The checklists included a total of 288 questions covering the following areas (between brackets, the number of questions):
 Policy & Strategic Objectives (13)
 Organization & Resources (11)
 Risk Management (18)
 Maintenance — Objectives/Organization (29)
 Maintenance — Planned Equipment Maintenance (8)
 Maintenance — Work Selection/Execution (14)
 Maintenance — Preventive Maintenance (15)
 Maintenance — Corrective Maintenance (6)
 Maintenance — Reliability and Maintenance Improvement (3)
 Operations Practice (20)

 Design & Construction for Modifications (9)
 Inspection & Monitoring (30) – Note: Includes Corrosion & Materials
 Management of Change (10)
 Information Management (11)
 Staff Competency (7)
 Third Party Services (9)
 Anomalies, Repairs & Failure Analysis (8)
 Rotating Machinery (16)
 Instrumentation (18)
 Electrical (39)

5.3 The Service Provider interviewed around 15 plant personal : Safaniyah Operation Superintendent, Maintenance Superintendent, Engineering Superintendent, Engineering General Supervisor, Operation Utilities Engineer, Maintenance Engineering Supervisor, Reliability Supervisor (and technicians), Maintenance Foreman for Utilities, Maintenance Planners, Corrosion Engineer, Senior Inspection Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Instrument & Control Engineers, Process Engineer, Rotating Equipment Engineer.
5.4 Although these interviews generated some useful information, the verification process was not properly/fully conducted due to:
a) Some data were not available (due to virus attack, in some cases) and
b) Time was not sufficient for the verification process to take place.
5.5 Due to the limited time, the analysis conducted on site was not deep with any significant/relevant discussions on critical issues, root causes and solutions.
5.6 Preliminary report was reflecting “what they were told”, rather than a formal analysis of hard data (failure histories, reports, trends, etc.). Further analysis has been conducted in their office in U.S such as the development of Integrity Operating Window.
5.7 Although the check list seems to be comprehensive, covering an ample range of items, the time they have to properly cover all of them was very limited. In essence, they utilized only 6 full days on site to conduct interviews to a number of people, collect and review some data files and conduct a preliminary analysis of the data for such a long list of items.

6 Conclusions

The Assessment only provided a high level verification of the asset integrity management and safe operations system’s existence and readiness. The assessment was not performed as planned with a detailed and focused methodology to improve assets efficiency, enhance performance and assure safety, integrity and reliability of the Safaniyah Utility Plant. This contractor can be utilized to perform high level integrity system assessment only.

7 Recommendations for Asset Performance Management Assessment

To improve the quality of the assessment:
 To separate a high level assessment (system level), from a detailed assessment (health check / reliability and integrity assessment). These two levels of assessments could be addressed through different contractors.
 Increase the time for the site data gathering and interviews to at least 2 weeks
 Ensure that the Service Provider team has access to key data/information several weeks before they arrive on-site. This will definitely facilitate the review/validation process.
 Conduct another pilot as new service providers are becoming available utilizing Asset Integrity Management approach. This will avail more resources to facilitate the assessment of integrity with Saudi Aramco and support operational Excellence assessments.


 

Other Info

Document Category Engineering
Document Target Users

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *