Summary
No. of risks closed/
Sr. No. Risk Owners Assigned No. of In Progress risks
1 ABC 2/10 4
2
3
4
5
6
Any Help required
No. of critical risks (e.g., mitigation plan changes, cost approvals, decisions)
5
Deepak Fertlizer
Ammonia Project
RISK PRIORITIZATION: 5 Risks Discussed with Mitigation plans
RISK TYPE RISK TITLE RISK DESCRIPTION PROJECT PHASE (L1)
18. Land Related 18.8 Plot Plan/Layout Availability of parcel of land Pre-project
(size)
1
1. Project Size/Complexit 1.2 Sensitive - Ammonia leakage from Pre-commissioning,
environmental, social or process, excessive CO2 Commissioning,
safety issues emissions Project lifetime
9. Engineering 9.5 Signing - EPC contract signing Pre-project
contracts/agreements delayed due to land issues
and open points
1
1. Project Size/Complexit 1.1 Unusual legal or -Tripartite agreements may Pre-project
contractual arrangements have compromises or high
cost
1. Project Size/Complexit 1.2 Sensitive Pre-project
environmental, social or -Facility for ZLD or Emission
safety issues norms required CAPEX
1. Project Size/Complexit 1.1 Unusual legal or - IBR contract might not be Pre-project
contractual arrangements signed
10. Procurement 10.1 Attitude of vendors - Toyo claiming high costs Project lifecycle
and contractors to time for small changes in
constraints, scope changes localization
and litigation
10. Procurement 10.16 Extent and impact of - Boiler and GTG schedule Procurement
long lead time items revision as requirements
remain unfrozen
2. Economic/Financial 2.1 Energy prices / quantity - Change in natural gas price Pre-commissioning,
Commissioning,
Project lifetime
1
10. Procurement 10.26 Equipment Spares - Spares may not be Procurement
procured in time to check
with the corresponding
equipment before delivery
10. Procurement 10.4 Limited availability of -Toyo India might quote Pre-project
alternative vendors and high prices taking
contractors advantage of the situation
of being the only viable
vendor (EPC) given they
have in-depth project
context
1
11. Construction 11.9 Complexity of - Complexity due to parallel construction
interfaces with concurrent work done by different sub-
work contractors at the site
1
11. Construction 11.8 Unusual or difficult - Specialty cranes with high construction
lifting with cranes boom lengths and load
capacity might be needed
for vertical constructions
17. Hazards 17.3 Pressure (pneumatic - High pressure gas/ steam Project lifecycle
tools, high pressure leaks
gas/steam leaks, vent
discharge, equipment
rupture, vacuum, blowing
particulates)
17. Hazards 17.2 Chemical-acute and - Release of Chemical-acute Project lifecycle
toxic (asphyxiants, poisons, and toxic
chemical burns,
carcinogens, inert gases,
runaway reactions,
incompatible materials,
corrosion, contamination,
chemical spills)
17. Hazards 17.4 Temperature (hot - Hot surfaces or exhaust Project lifecycle
surfaces or exhaust gases, gases, steam blow down,
steam blow down, molten molten material,
material, cryogenic surfaces heavy/non-porous clothing,
and materials, heavy/non- extreme ambient
porous clothing, extreme temperatures
ambient temperatures)
17. Hazards 17.5 Mechanical (sharp - Mechanical related (sharp Project lifecycle
edges, tripping, bumping, edges, tripping, bumping,
slippery surfaces, heavy slippery surfaces, heavy
objects to lift, falling objects to lift, falling
objects, objects,
unguarded/unstable unguarded/unstable ladders
ladders or platforms, or platforms, ejected parts
ejected parts or fragments, or fragments, unguarded
unguarded pinch or crush pinch or crush points,
points, unexpected object unexpected object or hose
or hose movement, movement, equipment
equipment degeneration degeneration and
and malfunction) malfunction)
18. Land Related 18.4 Additional land - Increased land may be Pre-project
required required if footprint
changes due to additional
skirting needed for
localisation
2. Economic/Financial 2.2 Financing - Project loan not acquired Pre-project
costs/discount rate at an optimal interest rate
PROBABILITY SEVERITY RISK RATING IMPACT ELEMENT
Almost Certain (4) Very High (4) Schedule,Cost
36
Possible (2) High (3) safety
20
Probable (3) High (3) Schedule
25
Possible (2) High (3) Cost
20
Possible (2) High (3) Cost
20
Possible (2) High (3) Cost
20
Probable (3) High (3) Cost
25
Probable (3) High (3) Schedule
25
Possible (2) Very High (4) Cost
24
Probable (3) Medium (2) Schedule
20
Possible (2) High (3) Cost
20
Probable (3) Medium (2) Cost & Schedule
20
Probable (3) High (3) Schedule
25
Possible (2) High (3) Safety
20
Possible (2) High (3) Safety
20
Possible (2) High (3) Safety
20
Possible (2) High (3) Safety
20
Possible (2) High (3) Schedule
20
Possible (2) Very High (4) Cost
24
#N/A
POSSIBLE
RISK RESPONSE ROOT CAUSES CURRENT CONTROLS CONSEQUENCE2
Escalate -Availability of land Already Escalated Delay in project
-unwillingness of Current execution
owners to sell
Mitigate Ammonia process - Selection of good Shutting down of
produces 2000TPD but is EPC having sound plant by regulatory
usually in combination experience in design, authorities
with an urea plant where construction and
CO2 is consumed commissioning of
Ammonia is being piped such facility
from production to
storage tank in opposite
tank which may result in
leakages
Mitigate - Finalizing Plot Plan ObtainedEPC ISBL Project schedule will
-Clarity on Required technical offer, be adversely affected
Facilities unpriced commercial
offer
Soil investigation
ready to place order
Meeting with EPC
contractor for clarity
of OSBL facilities
Mitigate - Vendor taking advantage - Contractual - increased cost
already being on board obligations put in
- tax components effecting place
overall cost - Most of Eqpt/Matl in
final mfg/delivery
stage
Mitigate - Stringent statuatory Facility desing to Shutting down of
requirement of MIDC meet MIDC norms plant by regulatory
authorities
Mitigate - Unable to Find and - Agency identified Delay in project
finalizing the right agency and negotiated for execution
- High prices demand by taking up the
identified agencies requirements
Mitigate - Due to Single source - Plan B in place to Project cost will
onboard vendor counter the monopoly significantly increase
- Improper evaluation on - Proper evaluation by
Owner side subject matter
experts and negotiate
with justificaiton
Mitigate - Delay in finalizing steam - Scheme concluded Project schedule can
and power scheme - Strategies being be affected if GTG and
- Delay in awarding GTG discussed to ensure boiler do not arrive on
due to delayed EPC award GTG ordered time
Accept - Pricing policy of supply in None Plant may need to
company shut down due to
- Government policies affordability issues of
downstream plants
Mitigate - Spare parts identification - Spare parts lists standard spares will
- Delay in placing the PO being reviewed and need to be procured
- Vendor related issues finalized in the absence of
causing delays in delivery -PCPL has control to machine availability
order the spares to check real-time
Mitigate Toyo possesses an - Availability of matter Pay a premium on
upperhand in terms of experts enabling EPC cost / Engage
information of the project negotiation another EPC
- PCPL/DFPCL as an contractor leading to
entity can influence significant delays
not happen
Transfer to EPC - Multiple contracting -EPCs currently Project schedule and
strategy considered are quality will be
- limitation of plot size experts in such adversely affected
- Aggressive schedule constructions
Transfer to EPC -plot size limitations -EPCs currently - delays in execution
- Equipment installation considered are - safety concerns
requirements experts in such
constructions
Mitigate - Equipment failures due - Proper preservation Delay in project
to improper preservation methods avoiding execution and
- Lax in supervision by such occurences are personal injuries
personnel on site being put in place
Mitigate - Equipment Failures - Preservation -personnel injuries
- Operations skill set methods being
monitored
- skill set of Operation
team to be
established
- Detailed and
Exhaustive SOPs to be
developed
Mitigate - improper execution - Implementing Safety Personnel injuries
- Awareness procedures during
construction and
commissioning phase
Mitigate - Safety norms and - Implementing Safety Personnel injuries
procedures at work place procedures during
construction phase
- Safety sign board on
the site for awareness
Mitigate - Localization of ordered - verification Project delays in
eqpt completed for getting required land
localization parcels
Mitigate - Project justification - Established Cash flow will be
- Owner track record organization with crunched post
sufficient finance exhausting current
controls line of credit
COST RISK IMPACT, INR CR SCHEDULE RISK IMPACT, DAYS
10 per month
1-2 months
7 cr in Capex and ~50/cum* in opex
additional (prelimnary estimates)
MITIGATION PLAN MITIGATION COST (INR Lakh)
Layout Optimization
Expediting land acquisition
-Ensure specifications are strictly
adhered at execution phase
- Quality checks to Ensure the same
Obtain technical offer for OSBL with
BOQ line items
well negotiated tripatriate agreements
to be in place
ZLD system planned and implemented
as part of the project
IBR agency identified and being
negotiated to be on board
Well defined scope to be in place and
additional scope to have unit rates
defined in contract
Early procurement strategy is worked
out
Explore option to get into a long term
contract with NG provider to stabilise
the price being paid for NG
Spares lists are obtained and being
consolidated to enable ordering
Building a detailed cost estimate basis
scope. To use this during negotiations
Discuss with management about
introducing artificial competition by
inviting other EPC offers
Review of density planning
Sub-contract scoping
Constructibility study carried out during
EPC phase
Preservation methods follwed by
Vendor procedures
Proper operation and maintainance
crew in place
-Enforcing PPE at work place
- Ensuring safe sork culture
-Enforcing PPE at work place
- Ensuring safe sork culture
- Plot plan studies done and required
land parcel is arrived at
Current financing options are chosed
optimizing the finance costs
Risk Response Monitoring & Control
RISK OWNER NAME ACTION TAKEN SINCE LAST REVIEW
Arun
Arun
Mahesh
PMC/McK
Arun
PCPL
Anand Mahalay
PMC/PCPL
PMC
EPC
EPC
EPC/PCPL/PMC HSE
EPC/PCPL
EPC/PCPL/PMC HSE
EPC/PCPL/PMC HSE
Arun
Mahesh
ol
DEADLINE FOR ACTION LAST REVIEW DATE
(DD/MM/YY) (DD/MM/YY) CURRENT STATUS COMMENTS
RISK
RESPONS PROBABIL CURRENT
E SEVERITY
Very Low ITY IMPACT STATUS
Avoid (0) Rare
Unlikely Cost
(0) Closed
Mitigate Low (1) (1) Schedule Open
Medium Possible Reputatio Under
Escalate (2) (2) n Progress
Probable
Accept High (3) (3) Sales
Almost
Very High Certain
Transfer (4) (4) Safety
Severity
Medium
Very Low (0Low (1) (2) High (3) Very High (4)
Rare (0) 2 3 4 5 6
Unlikely (1) 3 9 12 15 18
Possible (2) 4 12 16 20 24
Probable (3) 5 15 20 25 30
Probability Almost Certain (4) 6 18 24 30 36
