Châteaubriant, July 2017

 

 What is the handover ?

As part of their contract, the EPC (Engineering, Procurement and Construction) must provide all their project data to their clients, the OO (Owner Operator), which is called the “handover”.

EPCs generate vast amounts of engineering information (3D asset models, electrical information, component specifications, piping and instrumentation diagrams, safety indications, etc.). This information is important for operational teams involved in the project. Indeed, it plays a key role in the operational start date of the project, thus enabling the teams to be properly informed and oriented. It is particularly used for maintenance, asset management, risk assessment and compliance system analysis.

This article is a follow-up to the study of a report published by AVEVA in 2017. This report is focused on the handover approach and the concerns of 50 decision-makers on oil & gas projects. In addition, six independent oil and gas management experts were interviewed to develop a handbook on best practices for a better handover.

Many companies criticize the handover for creating unnecessary risks, additional costs and significant delays. These three main criticisms are due to a lack of definition of the end-of-project deliverables and the fact that the handover is considered as a final stage project and not as a throughout process .

The handover, a discredited practice

 

The handover in the industrial field has always appeared as a problem. Most often, there is a discrepancy between the information expected by the owners of general facilities and the information provided by the EPCs. This is due to a lack of contract definition of “handover” , upstream of the project, on the type of information expected, the format and the document submission deadline.

The three types of errors during the handover (filing error, wrong denomination and wrong marking) result in a substantial loss of time in order to identify the correct information. This results in significant costs that delay the project launch following the handover, as well as long downtime period.

 

The serious consequences of a bad handover

Among the interviewed owner operators, the AVEVA study shows that :

• 98% surveyed experienced delays due to a poor handover.
• 90% faced additional costs due to misclassified information and 84% to make the data usable on their systems.
• 92% believe that at least one of the information-related problems has caused significant delays.

A bad handover therefore results in significant and unforeseen costs.

 

Findings of the AVEVA study

Finding 1: There is a gap of understanding between what the owner-operators are asking for and what the EPC are delivering.

Finding 2: The use of information management technologies is inadequate

Finding 3: The handover is considered as a late stage and is pushed back at the end of the projects by the owners

 

How can we reduce handover costs and delays?

The handover process can be improved to reduce the price, time limit and risks. According to the six independent experts interviewed and the 50 owners, here are the recommendations to adopt for a better handover:

A) Planning a quality handover: Opting for a gradual transfer of information

The contract between EPCs and OOs must therefore define exactly what data is expected and in what type of format it must be transmitted, and those for all different information (process, electrical and mechanical data, engineering standard ...).

Experts advocate planning, meaning, defining important data transfer steps and not just a single deadline at the end (the handover). It is important to impose contractual steps in the provision of information, to establish monitoring and better communication between the CPS and the owners. This would improve information sharing and thus, according to 68% of respondents, reduce the cost and delays.

B) Implement appropriate information management technologies

Effective progressive transfer requires that the right technologies be put in place to support engineering standards and the transfer schedule. The use of new software for the handover requires investments, in the own software as well as in training.

The handover must be planned upstream and integrated since the beginning of the project. A planned handover reduces the costs and time associated with the challenges listed above.

 

 It is essential to change the handover practices.

According to surveyed experts, the handover in its current form is a waste of time, inefficient and often has an impact on asset profitability. The second is that these problems can be solved by moving to a progressive and planned handover approach (as seen earlier with the introduction of control steps). In the handover's existing practices, the inefficiency of information delivered results in unforeseen costs and delays. They may be small compared to the asset overall value, but they are not insignificant because they can reach several million dollars.

The need for change is strong. The handover must be part of the discussion and be planned at the beginning of any project. Those who rely on engineering data, drawings, documents and models should be consulted, and time should be spent identifying what information should be submitted, how it will be presented and structured. This should also include the establishment of steps to define scheduling which would stipulate dates of information delivery . The exact details should be clearly explained to all parties and defined in the contracts. All formats must be defined beforehand to allow the use of the right dedicated technology for the management of engineering information flows.

This combination of a planning process introduction and the choice of a dedicated technology allow the transmission of all information in a controlled, verified and regular manner. It provides clear monitoring and projects cost control, saving hundreds of thousands of hours per day in verifying technical data.

This report has shown that replacing the handover practice with a flow of usable and progressive information in proprietary systems offers real savings and efficiencies for both the owner and the EPC: an improvement of the existing and proactive process to save time and money throughout the project but also at the end of the project.

 

 

You liked this article ? Share it on social medias !