Performance Management System PETRONAS Planning & Appraisal (Year-2013)

Status In Review Approve Year End Review

Manager/ Superior Rosli bin Karim
Employee Hasnal bin Tamjehi
Validity Period Jan 1, 2013 To Dec 31, 2013

PETRONAS Planning & Appraisal

The system has been developed to support Performance Management in PETRONAS. The diagram above
shows the 4 phases of the Performance Cycle.
Rating 0

Overall Final Rating

No value

Image Column 0

1 Objective
Instruction : 1. Employees to complete objective setting for the assessment period after discussion with
superior. 2. During Mid Year Review and Year End Review, please summarise in 500 words the
performance result, impact, challenges and effort .
Rating 0

1.1 Division Operation - Project Execution & Delivery

Note Objective

FEED Engineering Deliverables

Manage engineering quality and provide technical leadership through initiation or review of value adding
technical proposition contributed to project cost savings.
i. TP units of LLDPE, LDPE, BPA, CPU, PPU, EOEG
ii. Non-TP Unit of VRLS, LYB, PO
iii. FEED Deliverables
iv. Deliver MR documents for identified equipment in PETCHEM

Weightage 20

Rating

3 - Meet Expectation

Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

1.1) Quality FEED deliverables

Base: Minimum re-work with no schedule impact
S2: No re-work and no schedule impact
S1: No re-work and improve schedule

1.2) Number of technical recommendations implemented that contribute to project cost savings
Base: 1
S2: >3
S1: >5

1.3) Percentage of potential cost saving

Base: 1M
S2: 2M
S1: >3M
 Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
1.1) Minimum re-work with no schedule impact
1.2) 1 (Critical equipment)
1.3) 1M

Impact (I):
- 15% cost estimation accuracy for overall PETCHEM unit from critical equipment deliverables conducted
for TP unit.
- 34 critical equipment identified and accomplish by early June 2013 as per schedule

Challenges (C):
- All design/maintenance aspects are covered.
- Needs to consider maintenance aspect of static equipment as well as limits of design as per TEMA,
EMMUA 190, API, etc.
- Perform more than 8-10 overlapping package unit review/discussion/evaluation with customize design
- High expectation from management with very time constraint
- Licensor and FEED contractor reluctant to adapt RAPID Project technical specification

Effort (E):
- Conducted “joint review meeting” for critical equipment documents with contractor (TP) to reduce time in
commenting the documents
- Conducted weekly technical alignment meeting throughout Mechanical RAPID project team to
standardized the technical understanding
- Project specification clarification: MR document review which include comment on capital spare, special
tools, PMI requirement, lifting equipment, hydro test requirement, N2 preservation, cleaning, packaging
and shipment.
- Large diameter and proposed length for shell and tube hex – recommend licensor to furnish estimated
weight, reference for successful operation, location/elevation for operability / maintainability reason.
- Technical datasheet review - compare PTS Vs contractor datasheet to ensure all essential data
captured. Recommendation to include type of vessel, service type, overpressure protection, vessel
support type, welded pressure joint requirement as per UW, PG & PSV shall be provided on the pressure
vessels as to comply with essential fittings as per DOSH requirement.
- PV drawing review – minimum nozzle size, manholes/hand holes requirement, head type, weld neck
requirement, standard drawings compliant.
- Review of documents from other discipline (IDC). Major technical comments:
1 – Prohibition the use of compressed asbestos for gasket
2 – Requirement of Plot plan for laydown area, integrated warehouse, elevator for platform which requires
frequent maintenance

1.2 Division Operation - Project Execution & Delivery

Note Objective

FEED Execution and Interface Management

Manage FEED engineering work activities including interfaces, work progress within project baseline
schedule and acceptable schedule variance, and project cost within contract value and agreed variation.
i. TP units of LLDPE, LDPE, BPA, CPU, PPU, EOEG
ii. Non-TP Unit of VRLS, LYB, PO
iii. FEED Deliverables

Weightage 20

Rating

3 - Meet Expectation
 Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

2.1) Progress variance between plan and actual

Base: -10%
S2: 0%
S1: +10%

2.2) Achievement of key engineering or agreed milestones

Base: Milestone achieved per schedule
S2: Milestone achieved ahead of schedule
S1: N/A

2.3) Cost variance due to agreed trend item as compared to FEL 3 Contract Value
Base: -5%
S2: 0%
S1: 5% cost savings

2.4) Number of work process improvement implemented (to recover the delay)
Base: 1
S2: >2
S1: >3

Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
2.1) 0%
2.2) Milestone achieved per schedule
2.3) 0%
2.4) 1

Impact (I):
- Critical equipment deliverables concluded as per time frame agreed and use for ITB EPCC preparation
- Prevent design flaws in compliance to FMA regulation.
- Ensure deliverables produced by FEED contractor complies with project specification, ITB, PTS
requirement.
- Ensure compliance to local regulation in design
- Proper establishment of EPCC scope can avoid scope changing or variance order (VO) at next phase
which can delay the project with significant cost.

Challenges (C):
- Critical equipment & FEED deliverables started with very constraint schedule and overlapping task
- Long queue process in reviewing the document due to many discipline/party involved which may
contribute to progress delay
- Appointed Lead for mechanical static fired for PETCHEM LOC
- Huge number of documents received from licensor to be reviewed (average more than 100 docs/week)
within time limitation (10 days)
- meeting revised project dateline
- Ensuring recommendations could be implemented for all licensor and does not contradict with other
project specification.
- High expectation from client in providing the solution.
- Adding more values for Projects/OPUs benefit.
- Entertain additional scope request from projects.
- Implementation of safety requires comprehensive and suitable procedure to be followed.

Effort (E):
- Review session for critical equipment deliverables with contractor conducted average 1 or 2 week/
equipment earlier than expected schedule
- Accelerate the critical equipment activities by providing advanced copy comment (CRS) to contractor
while waiting uploaded officially in
P-eDMS system
- Planning the daily/weekly/monthly activities with job distribution and adapt with the changes time to time
for mechanical PETCHEM LOC
- Plot plan – include maintenance access for above pipe rack ACHE, loading area for vessel with internals,
bundle puling area for removable bundle, maintenance philosophy for vertical hex.

1.3 Division Operation - Project Execution & Delivery

 Note Objective

EPCC ITB Preparation and Technical Evaluation.

Delivering and coordinate EPCC ITB preparation and technical evaluation within agreed milestone and
quality assured.

Mechanical:
- Sect C Part II 4.3
- Technical Evaluation Criteria
- Team member clarification for package 6, 8, 11

Weightage 20

Rating

3 - Meet Expectation

Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

3.1) Timeliness
Base: Agreed timeframe/ schedule
S2: 2 weeks ahead of schedule
S1: >1 month ahead of schedule

3.2) Quality of Work

Base: Minimum re-work with no schedule impact
S2: No re-work and no schedule impact
S1: No re-work and improve schedule

3.3) Stakeholder acceptance and/ or governance acceptance including PIR/ DTR score
Base: Accepted with minimum re-work
S2: Accepted with no re-work
S1: Accepted with no re-work and improve schedule

Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
3.1) Agreed timeframe/ schedule
3.2) Minimum re-work with no schedule impact
3.3) Accepted with minimum re-work

Impact (I):
- RAPID project mechanical design basis is referred to project specification and PTSs to ensure design
integrity and codes & standard compliance

Challenges (C):
- more 6 package overlapping ITB EPCC under Technical Clarification phase despite with ongoing FEED
activities for PETCHEM (VRS & PC)

Effort (E):
- Propose manning mechanical team for ITB EPCC activities until year 2014 with considering ongoing
FEED activities in overall PETCHEM unit with minor dependent to contractor (TP)
- Provide Technical Evaluation Criteria checklist for Bidder selection and compliance monitoring purposes

1.4 HSE

Note Objective

HSE Programs and Compliance

Inculcate HSE culture through implementation of design safety and safety program, and compliance to
corporate HSE requirement.

Weightage 10
 Rating

3 - Meet Expectation

Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

4.1) Number of safety element incorporated or program conducted

Base: 1
S2: >3
S1: >5

4.2) Project compliance to corporate HSE requirements i.e. MCF

Base: 100% compliance to MANDATORY requirements
S2: 100% compliance to ALL requirements with approved deviations
S1: 100% compliance to ALL requirements

Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
4.1) 1
4.2) 100% compliance to MANDATORY requirements

Impact (I):
- Ensure the strengthening of health, safety and environment (HSE) governance.
- Ensuring that all are accountable for full compliance with ZeTo rules.
- Ensure safe working culture among staff.
- Compliance to Malaysian local regulation eg: DOSH/DOE
- Inculcate HSE practice and info sharing in RAPID project team

Challenges (C):
- Ensure all activities are carried out in a safe manner and any non-compliance is not tolerated.
- Balanced efforts in supporting business needs and meeting HSE requirements.
- Implementation of safety element require comprehensive and suitable procedure to be followed, mindset
changes, takes time & involvement of cost and recommendation shall be practical

Effort (E):
- Attended weekly engineering meeting and sharing HSE relevant issue related to RAPID project
- Enforced requirement from local regulation related to DOSH/DOE to all licensor:
i). Requirement to use Low NOx Burner to control emission stated in ITB.
ii). To ensure every Pressure Vessel integrated with safety valve with proper venting and drainage system.
iii). Compliance to DOE on emission produce by fired equipment
- Includes safety factor in design review such as material selection, safety distance etc.
- incorporate safety requirement as per regulation requirement such as safety valve requirement.

1.5 Strategic Initiatives

Note Objective

Deployment of PETRONAS technology, Technical Standard and specialized services in projects

1. Deploy GTS/ PETRONAS technology in project - P-EDMS, P-ADV Tray, ELSOR, F&G Mapping, RBI
etc

2. Implementation of PTS requirement in RAPID Project

Weightage 10

Rating

3 - Meet Expectation
 Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

5.1) Number of technology and specialized services deploy to project.

B:1 technology and/or specialized services
S2: 2 technology and/or specialized services
S1: More than 2 technology and/or specialized services

5.2) Implement and compliance to Project Authority/ Governance requirements as per mech project
design basis philosophy and specification
B: Full compliance to Mech. engineering disciplines
S2:Full compliance to Mech. Engineering disciplines including HSE
S1:N/A

Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
5.1) 1 technology and/or specialized services
5.2). Full compliance to Mech. engineering disciplines

Impact (I):
- implementation of P-eDMS in RAPID project as main platform database during FEED
- Consideration of licensor to utilize P-ADV tray with GTS support and guideline
- RAPID project specification is referred to PTS to ensure design integrity and codes/standards
compliance
- Up to date PTS for PETRONAS wide usage and to meet mechanical KPIs.
- Ensure codes and standards compliance.

Challenges (C):
- Licensor reluctant and propose its own technology
- Alignment with licensor/contractor dateline schedule on P-eDMS usage in reviewing the document
- Balanced efforts in supporting business needs and management initiatives in the RAPID project and
GTS Mechanical.
- PTS standardization approach and contributed document for reference.

Effort (E):
- Ensure every relevant documents for mechanical static following minimum requirement of RAPID project
spec/PTS
-Captured lesson learnt from others/previous project to be implemented in RAPID project as below:
i). Design & operating of equipment shall consider shutdown cycle for DOSH inspection
ii). Fired equipment to have minimum requirement as follow:
- 2 flame scanner for each Low NOx burner
- Air blow system for peep hole
iii). To have CEMS in monitoring the emissions
- Developed checklist for reviewing contractor’s pressure vessel, heat exchanger, tanks datasheet.
- Completed review of 14 design specification for static equipment and 8 design specifications for package
equipment.

1.6 Financial

Note Objective

Revenue earned through technical services rendered

Maximize GTS participation in the Project thus contribute to revenue earned through technical services
rendered.

Weightage 10

Rating

3 - Meet Expectation
 Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

6.1) Timely time reporting submission

Base: Before end of month
S2: N/A
S1: N/A

6.2) Percentage of chargeable man-hours utilization

Base: 85%
S2: 90%
S1: >95%

6.3) Number of in-house specialist/ program utilized thus reduce third party dependency and cost
containment within group
B: 1
S2:3
S1:>5

Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
6.1) Before end of month
6.2) 90%
6.3) 1

Impact (I):
- Consultation by GTS for RAPID project in preparing the FEED deliverables provide the Cost Savings,
Capability Building for PETRONAS, Better Governance, Front End Control within company.
- Ensure design integrity & codes/standards compliance and implemented.

Challenges (C):
- Meeting project dateline
- Process feed scheme and significant RAPID PETCHEM strategy changes that impact to capacity and
equipment design requirement.

Effort (E):
- Undertaking task for mechanical static unfired discipline in reviewing/evaluation/discussion to ease the
huge workload received from licensor/FEED contractor in LOC. Normal workload 100-200 docs/weekly
- Process datasheet (Static) – review TDS submitted by OFC & licensor. Among major technical
comments is to include ITQ requirement such as heat exchange surface area, insulation requirement,
construction code, MDMT, cooling water velocity in tubes.

1.7 People Development

Note Objective

Capability development

Drive capability development on FEED capability and E1/ E2 ACD progression.

Weightage 10

Rating

3 - Meet Expectation
 Note Performance Indicator / Measurement

7.1) Percentage of gap closed against current competency level for ACD score
Base: 20%
S2: 30%
S1: 40%

7.2) Number of coaching session attended

Base: 5
S2: 8
S1: 10

7.3) Number of SKG training attended

Base: 1
S2: 2
S1: 3

Note Comments / Evidences

Result (R):
7.1) 34%
7.2) 5
7.3) 1

Impact (I):
- Accelerate technical competency development to support RAPID project mission & vision
- Have sufficient knowledge employees with the right attitude

Challenges (C):
- Balance effort in supporting needs & personal capability development in RAPID project & GTS
- Involvement in job assignment that relevant to ACD TI&R static fired maintenance, inspection, etc
- To further involved in project especially towards detail engineering and construction phase.
- Take initiative by revalidating project calculation in order to close gap.

Effort (E):
- Assist E1 engineer static fired in GTS/other OPU for ACD preparation by providing knowledge sharing
and guideline.
- Continuously seeking for advice from technical coach and supervisor to accelerate capability.
- Conduct coaching session with technical coach to reflect gap closure against project involved.

2 Staff Involvement/Contribution
Instruction : Please indicate your involvement or contribution in any initiatives/taskforces/projects etc during
the appraisal period. People Management Contribution or Staff Involvement will be one of the elements to
determine overall final rating (OFR) during People Development Committee (PDC).
3 Employee's Comments
Instruction: Please summarise your comments on overall performance and appraisal during the period, if
any.
4 Summary of Overall Final Rating
Instruction: Immediate superior to recommend overall final rating (OFR) and summarize key achievements
and overall performance during the period of assessment. The Summary of Overall Final Rating will be
critical trigger point during PDC discussion. OFR is final and conclusive after PDC deliberation and superior
is responsible to inform PDC decision to subordinate.
Overall Final Rating

3
Note Overall Final Rating

En. Hasnal has shown willingness to go beyond his boundry. He stepped outside his field of expertise to
ensure all FEED deliverables for mechanical meets all the required requirement such as schedule, quality
and cost.

Need to be more resourceful and enhance skills and knowledge in mechanical equipment construction,
application and maintenance.

1. Maintain deliverables schedule by monitoring progress, coordinating overlapping activities and

resolving problems professionally
2. Manage and control engineering deliverables by reviewing design and specifications effectively.
3. Effectively plan and schedule changes in work execution or project specification by
recommending corrective actions.