Engineering Procedure 14 December 2022

SAEP-17
Capital Management System
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee

Previous Revision: 28 October 2021 Next Revision: 28 October 2026

Contact: MOFARIHM Page 1 of 153
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Contents
SUMMARY OF CHANGES ...................................................................................................... 3
1 SCOPE .............................................................................................................................. 8
2 CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS ....................................................................................... 9
3 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 9
4 ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS .................................................................................... 10
5 CMS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 18
6 CMS ENABLERS OVERVIEW AND GOVERNANCE ...................................................... 19
7 PORTFOLIO EXECUTION PLANNING (PXP) ................................................................. 41
8 PROJECT SPONSOR (PS) AND INTEGRATED PROJECT TEAM (IPT) ........................ 63
9 VALUE ASSURANCE...................................................................................................... 77
10 TARGET SETTING .................................................................................................... 101
11 ACCELERATED CMS ................................................................................................ 110
12 CMS FOR DIGITAL PROJECTS ................................................................................ 124
13 CMS FOR PROJECT REPLICATION & EXECUTION OUTSOURCING .................... 130
14 RAPID® MATRIX ....................................................................................................... 136
DOCUMENT HISTORY ....................................................................................................... 138
ATTACHMENT I – PROJECT SPONSOR DECISION FORM .............................................. 139
ATTACHMENT II – PROJECT SPONSOR DECISION LOG ................................................ 140
ATTACHMENT III – OFFLINE GATE ENGAGEMENT TEMPLATE ..................................... 141
ATTACHMENT IV – PXP LENSES/DOMAINS CHANGE REQUEST FORM ....................... 143
ATTACHMENT V – VALUE ASSURANCE PROCESS WORKFLOW .................................. 144
ATTACHMENT VI – GATE ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE ...................................................... 145
ATTACHMENT VII – MANUFACTURER QUALITY SYSTEM SCREENING CHECKLIST ... 146
ATTACHMENT VIII – MANUFACTURER TECHNICAL SCREENING CHECKLIST ............. 148
ATTACHMENT IX – RAPID MATRIX FOR DIGITAL PROJECTS ........................................ 151
ATTACHMENT X – DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION PROJECT MONTHLY REPORT .......... 152
ATTACHMENT XI - TARGET SETTING DELIVERABLE ..................................................... 153

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 2 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Summary of Changes

Paragraph Number Change Type

(Addition, Modification, Deletion, Technical Change(s)
New)
Previous Revision Current Revision
All CPED SAEP’s, manuals,
procedures combined into one
4/21/2020 See Technical
Modification document (SAEP-17) with
SAEP-17 Change(s)
process descriptions sections
for each CMS Enabler.
See Technical CMSEE process details
Change(s) moved to sections 7 -14; e.g.
4/21/2020
Modification Value Assurance Review
SAEP-17
process, Project Sponsor,
RAPID®, etc..
See Technical Removed a dedicated Front
4/21/2020 Change(s) End Loading manual. FEL
Deletion
SAEP-17 incorporated into all sections
as applicable.
See Technical SAEP-17: Added CMS
Change(s) processes into document:
Target Setting
4/21/2020 Accelerated Capital Projects
Addition
SAEP-17 CMS for Digital Projects
CMS Process for Project
Replication and Execution
Outsourcing
4/21/2020 See Technical Section 1.2: Revised for CMS
Change(s) Addition
SAEP-17 special cases application.
See Technical Section 1.2: Applicability,
4/21/2020
Change(s) Editorial references, key terms,
SAEP-17
acronyms, revised.
See Technical Section 6.2: IPT Leader
Change(s) engagement, communication,
4/21/2020
Addition and role and responsbility
SAEP-17
criteria with Project Sponsor
added.
See Technical Section 6.2: IPT Leader
Change(s) assignment timing and
transition criteria, Project
4/21/2020
Modification Sponsor endorsements and
SAEP-17
requirements clarified
including FEL phase merge
responsibilities.
See Technical Section 6.2: Added PS role
1/28/2020
Change(s) clarity on conflict resolutions in
PS Guide for type A Addition
the escalation process and
&B Projects
when involvement is required.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 3 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

See Technical Section 6.2: Enhanced clarity

Change(s) when the IPT Leader is
4/21/2020
Modification assigned (FEL 2) and the
SAEP-17
transtion requirements
between FEL 2/FEL 3.
See Technical Section 6.2: Clarity added for
4/21/2020
Change(s) Addition IPT Member continuity of
SAEP-17
team.
See Technical Section 6.2: Clarity added to
Change(s) the Functional Organizations
4/21/2020
Modification assigning IPT Members and
SAEP-17
any changes in IPT
membership required.
See Technical Section 6.2: Added IPT Leader
Change(s) guidance for conflict
4/21/2020
Addition resolutions in the escalation
SAEP-17
process and when to engage
PS.
4/21/2020 See Technical Section 6.2: Clarity added to
Change(s) Modification
SAEP-17 the dispute resolution process.
4/21/2020 See Technical Section 6.2: Offline Gate
Change(s) Addition
SAEP-17 Engagement process
See Technical Section 6.5: Addition to the
4/21/2020
Change(s) Addition Value Assurance
SAEP-17
engagements in FEL 3.
See Technical Section 6.5: Clarity on the
Change(s) Value Assurance
4/21/2020
Modification engagements with “SA
SAEP-17
programs”, JVs, and special
cases.
See Technical Section 6.3 Added
4/21/2020
Change(s) Addition requirements for brownfield
SAEP-17
projects.
See Technical Section 6.3: FEL Deliverables
Change(s) development requirements are
4/21/2020
Addition enhanced for more clarity
SAEP-17
including cost estimate
requirements in FEL 0.
See Technical Section 6.3: Added roles,
Change(s) responsibilities, and
requirements for Gate
4/21/2020 Engagements, RAPID®
Addition
SAEP-17 changes, FEL Deliverables
development and phase
merging between PS and
IPTL.
4/21/2020 See Technical Section 6.3: Execution
Change(s) Addition
SAEP-17 Handover process details.
See Technical Section 6.3: Criteria
4/21/2020
Change(s) Addition established for FEL
SAEP-17
Deliverables re-re-validation .

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 4 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

See Technical Section 6.3: FEL Gate 1 and

4/21/2020
Change(s) Modification Business Plan CheckPoint
SAEP-17
merged.
See Technical Section 6.4: Target Setting
4/21/2020
Change(s) Modification timing, frequeny and
SAEP-17
requirements revised.
See Technical Section 6.5: Revision to the
Change(s) roles and responsibilities for
4/21/2020 the Value Assurance findings
Modification
SAEP-17 closings, VAR re-validation,
Value Assurance submittals
and timelines.
4/28/2020 See Technical
Section 7.1: Revised PXP
SAEP-71 Change(s) Modification
Process Overview Figure 10.
See Technical Section 7.2.6: Market
4/28/2020 Change(s) Intelligence analysis roles and
Modification
SAEP-71 responsibilities clarified and
inputs vs. outputs revised.
4/28/2020 See Technical Section 7.2.3: Execution Path
Change(s) Addition
SAEP-71 flow chart added and revised.
See Technical
Change(s) Section 7.2.7: Improved the
PXP Lens opportunities
4/28/2020
Modification capture and track process with
SAEP-71
alignments into tracking
benefits and Lessons Learned.

See Technical
Change(s)
4/28/2020 Section 7: Eliminated Drilling
Deletion
SAEP-71 Projects from process (BI 60).

4/28/2020 See Technical Section 7.5: Modified PXP

Change(s) Modification
SAEP-71 Committee composition.
See Technical Section 7: Process details:
Change(s) - PXP Activity Streams
- Summary of PXP
4/28/2020
Deletion Deliverables
SAEP-71
- PXP Lenses Details
(Identification, Assessment,
Capture)
4/28/2020 See Technical Section 7.2.7: Redefined PXP
Change(s) Modification Circular Economy
SAEP-71
4/28/2020 See Technical Section 7.2.7: Introduced
Change(s) Addition Management of Change
SAEP-71
4/28/2020 See Technical Section 7.3: PXP governance
Change(s) Addition section added.
SAEP-71

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 5 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

See Technical Section 8.2, Section 6.5:

Change(s) Clarity added ensuring Value
4/21/2020 Assurance findings are
Addition
SAEP-17 included in the Decision
Support Package.
See Technical Section 8.1: Clarity added to
1/28/2020 Change(s) Project Sponsor roles at FEL
PS Guide for type A Modification Gates and requirements on
&B Projects the Gate Decision Support
Packages
See Technical Section 8.2: Added IPT
Change(s) Member role requirements for
4/21/2020 supporting progressive design
Addition
SAEP-17 reviews in the projects
delivery.
See Technical Section 8.2: Clarified IPT
4/21/2020 Change(s) Leader protocol and
Addition communications strategy with
SAEP-17
PS.
See Technical Section 8.2: Clarified IPT
Change(s) Leader’s responsibilities for
4/21/2020 documenting, tracking, and
Addition
SAEP-17 engaging the PS on conflict
resolutions.
See Technical Section 8.5: Responsibility
Change(s) added for “A-Agree” RAPID
4/21/2020 Deliverable owners with
Modification
SAEP-17 support from procedure
stakeholders.
See Technical Section 9.2: Value Assurance
4/26/2020 Change(s) review updated incorporating
Addition
SAEP-40 EPM requirements.
See Technical Section 9.2: PXP Lenses
4/26/2020 Change(s) linked into Value Assurance
Addition
SAEP-40 review process.
See Technical Section 9.2: Enhanced clarity
4/26/2020 Change(s) on applicable vs. non-
Modification
SAEP-40 applicable FEL Deliverables.
See Technical Section 9 Attachment V: Value
4/26/2020 Change(s) Assurance flow chart revised
Modification
SAEP-40 regarding deviation sheets.

3/2020 See Technical Section 10.2: Target Setting

Target Settings (TS) Change(s) requirements, timing, and
Modification frequency linked to scope
Process Guideline
development.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 6 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

See Technical Section 10.3: Default primary

3/2020 Change(s) project driver clarified with
Target Settings (TS) supporting roles and
Modification
Process Guideline responsibilities for changing
defaults.

3/2020 See Technical Section 10.4: Reporting

Target Settings (TS) Change(s) Targets vs Budget Estimate
Modification revised (Gate submittal
Process Guideline
Package)
See Technical Section 11: Replaced the
4/28/2020 Change(s) Autonomous Project Team
Addition (APT) role with the Integrated
SAEP-38
Project Team (IPT)
See Technical Section 11.4: Added “Electrical
4/28/2020 Change(s) Systems Design & Analysis”
Addition deliverable to Pre-FEED and
SAEP-38
FEED phase.
See Technical Section 12.3: Remove the TC-
New Change(s) Addition 68 and replace it with PSD soft
gate (PSD approval).
See Technical Section14: RAPID®: FEL
4/21/2020 Change(s) Book of Deliverable “Electrical
Addition
SAEP-17 Systems Design”.
See Technical Section14: RAPID®:
Change(s) “Technology Selection Report”
4/21/2020 include "I" role for
Modification
SAEP-17 Construction Agency and IT
S&TPD.

4/21/2020 See Technical Section14: RAPID®: include

Change(s) Addition ISD as an IPT member
SAEP-17
See Technical Section14: RAPID®: include
4/21/2020 Change(s) Power System Engineering
Modification Department (PSED) as a
SAEP-17
functional organization.
See Technical Section14: RAPID®: added
4/21/2020 Change(s) VIP- Applicable VIPs Reports
Addition
SAEP-17 deliverable to FEL 2 (Study).

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 7 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

1 Scope

This document governs Saudi Aramco’s (Company) CMS framework for

managing and controlling activities and decisions related to capital projects. The
CMS covers the entire project development process from business planning to
operations through project definition, planning, and execution. The document
details the CMS governance across the project lifecycle through implementing
CMS processes with defined roles and responsibilities of the key stakeholders.
In particular, the document describes the minimum requirements for project
delivery during early phases of project development prior to full funding through
ERA.

1.1 Applicability

This document applies to all fixed-scope engineered projects in the Company’s

10-Year Investment Plan and the 3-Year Business Plan requiring engineering
and project execution activities by the Company’s project delivery
organizations, except for:
• Exploration projects (BI-33)

• Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34)

• Development drilling projects (BI-60)

• Non-engineered projects, including Master Appropriations

• Maintain Potential projects

• Joint Ventures, 3rd Party Projects, and Mergers & Acquisitions

• Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only, for example

Miscellaneous Projects & Purchases (BI-19)

Projects categorized as Accelerated Capital Projects in the Business Plan are

governed by Section 11: Accelerated Capital Projects.

Projects categorized as Digital Projects are governed by Section 12: CMS for
Digital Projects Guideline.

Projects identified in the Business Plan to follow Thrift Design (tDesign) or

Project Proxy Execution (P2E) are governed by Section 13: CMS Process for
Project Replication and Execution Outsourcing.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 8 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

1.2 Validity

The CMS roles and responsibilities are based on the Company’s organizational
structure valid as of the issuance date of this procedure. Any organizational
changes impacting the organizational entities represented in this document will
require review, and update as required, of the roles and responsibilities for the
set of activities described.

2 Conflicts and Deviations

Any conflicts between this document and other applicable Mandatory Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be addressed to the
EK&RD Coordinator.

Any deviation from the requirements herein shall follow internal company
procedure SAEP-302.

3 References

The editions of the following reference documents that are in effect on the
project’s standards cut-off date (see SAEP-14) are applicable to this procedure:

3.1 Saudi Aramco References

Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan

SAEP-14 Project Proposal

SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines

SAEP-302 Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering

Requirement

SAEP-303 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation

SAEP-331 Project Schedule Requirements

SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines

SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements

SAEP-1350 Preparation of the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)

Saudi Aramco General Instructions

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 9 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

GI-0020.150 Leases – Project Type Prefix 15

GI-0030.001 Transaction Development Guidelines

GI-0202.451 Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary

Engineering Preparation

Saudi Aramco Best Practices

SABP-A-41 Project Synergy Planning Guidelines

SABP-A-042 Business Case Development Guidelines

Saudi Aramco Manuals and Forms

Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual

Enterprise Project Management Manual
Brownfield Readiness Indicator Checklist
Saudi Aramco Management Guide
MC/BLC Gate Submittal Guideline
FEL Book of Deliverables

3.2 Industry Codes and Standards

ISO 9001 Quality Management System - Requirements

4 Acronyms and Definitions

4.1 Acronyms

AAC Aramco Asia Company

AG Acceleration Gate

AOC Aramco Overseas Company

ASC Aramco Services Company

BFRI Brownfield Readiness Indicator Index

BI Budget Item

BISI Budget Item Supporting Information

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 10 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

BLC Business Line Committee

BLH Business Line Head

BP Business Plan

CA Construction Agency

CMS Capital Management System

CMSEE Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers

CPED Capital Program Efficiency Div.

CSD Consulting Services Department

C&MRD Contracting & Market Research Division

DBSP Design Basis Scoping Paper

DM Decision Maker

DT Digital Transformation

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EK&RD Engineering Knowledge & Resource Division

EP Environmental Protection

EPM Enterprise Project Management

ERA Expenditure Request Approval

ERC Expenditure Request Completion

ES Engineering Services

ESD Estimating Services Division

ERW Executability Review Workshop

FEED Front End Engineering and Design

FEL Front End Loading

FPD Facilities Planning Department

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 11 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

GAS Gate Alternative Selection

HDIR Host Design Intelligent Replication

ID Inspection Department

ID&SSD Industrial Development & Strategic Supply Dept.

IKTVA In Kingdom Total Value Add

IP Investment Plan

IPT Integrated Project Team

JV Joint Venture

LPD Loss Prevention Department

LUP Land Use Permit

MA Master Appropriation

MC Management Committee

MCC Mechanical Completion Certificate

MI Market Intelligence

MSS Master Scheduling System

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MoC Management of Change Request
MSAER Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements

NPV Net Present Value

P2E Project Proxy Execution

P&CSD Process & Control Systems Department

P&DSD Portfolio and Decision Support Department

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 12 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

PAER Prior Approval Expenditure Request

PCR Project Change Request

PDM Project Delivery Method

PFG Pre-Feed Gate

PM Project Management

PMC Project Management Contractor

PMOD Project Management Office Dept.

PP Project Proposal

PPA Project Proposal Approval

PS Project Sponsor

PSSD Project System Support Division

PVAG Project Value Assurance Group

PXP Portfolio Execution Planning

RACI Responsible. Accountable, Consult, Inform

RFP Request for Proposal

SATIP Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan

SCDR Scope Change from approved DBSP Request

SMP Supplemental Manpower

SRC Services Review Committee

S&MA Strategy and Marketing Analysis

TDI Team Development Index

TMD Technology Management Division

ToR Terms of Reference

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 13 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

TFR Technical & Functional Requirements

TS Target Setting

TSCRC TS Capital Review Committee

VA Value Assurance

VAR Value Assurance Review

VID Vendor Inspection Division

VIP Value Improving Practices

4.2 Definitions

Business Line Committee: The Decision Maker for small and less complex C
& C1-Type projects.

Characterization Committee: Constituents from FPD and PMOD involved in

the portfolio characterization exercise.

Check Point: A milestone at the end of a phase that does not require decision
gate engagement to proceed into the next phase such as Project Proposal
approval by the functional organizations, Mechanical Completion by the
Construction Agency, or Hand Over by Proponent.

Constraint: A certain event or condition having a negative effect on the

Company’s project execution and corporate objectives.

Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. The

Company’s Project Management administrative area is the default Construction
Agency for A, B and C-Type projects; and the Proponent’s Capital Program
Management team for C1-Type projects.

Core Project: A project involving aspects of the Company’s core business

related to hydrocarbons and petrochemicals products and their marketing and
sale. (Refer to GI-0030.001)

Cost Avoidance: The measure taken to avoid incurring capital expenditures on

planned capital projects in the 10-Year PXP Portfolio. The cost avoidance is a
measure to potentially lower Company’s future required cash flows.

Decision Support Package: A set of mandatory project gate submittals, set by

each Gatekeeper (MC or BLC) specific to the project type, to be produced
before accessing a gate and provide the Decision Maker with complete, current,

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 14 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

and relevant information sufficient to decide whether or not a project may

proceed into the next phase.

Executability Review Workshop (formerly Dynamic Portfolio

Management): A process supporting early decision-making on the actions
required to address portfolio execution constraints, risks, and opportunities.

Functional Control Activities: The project activities performed during the project
development in order to ensure project deliverables are developed in
compliance with the Company’s defined guidelines.

Gate: The decision point between different FEL phases, where a key
management decision must be made before a project proceeds to the next
phase.

Gatekeeper: The organization identified per the Management Guide to facilitate

gates. The gatekeeper will differ based on the project types, A and B-Type
(Management Committee) versus C and C1-Type (Business Line Committee).
Engagement is transmitted to the gatekeeper and per the readiness level of the
project, it is placed on the committee agenda.

Host Design: An available design of a facility that is technically suitable for the
project scope with a trackable operational record of robust performance.

Intelligent Replication: The opportunity of duplicating an existing “Host

Design” and standardization with minimal engineering effort. This will include
the identification of specific project development areas for which such approach
may yield cost and schedule benefits.

Management Committee: The Decision Maker for large and/or complex A & B-
Type projects.

Market Intelligence: An analysis of the market demand and supply conditions

relevant to the PXP portfolio to highlight market constraints and risks in the
execution of the projects.

MoC: Management of Change request that is required for any changes to the
PXP Lenses framework or its domains where the Manager of the PXP Lens
Champion Organization recommends the change, PMOD concurs the change
and Sr. VP ES approves the change.

Non-Repetitive Project: Capital projects in the Investment Plan with a low

frequency of occurrence.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 15 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Project Characterization: Classification of projects into A, B, C, and C1 based

on defined size and complexity criteria to determine the execution agency and
CMS governance.

Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate: An estimate of the materials and

services required to execute the portfolio in sufficient detail to enable
identification of constraints and risks on the availability of specific materials or
services.

Portfolio Risk Heat Map: A graphical representation of PXP risks based on

impact and probability to identify the most critical risks.

Portfolio Risk Register: Consolidated list of all risks, each evaluated and
classified according to impact and probability as per the Portfolio Risk
Assessment Matrix.

Portfolio Workforce Estimate: An estimate of the workforce (Regular and

SMP) required to execute the portfolio in sufficient detail to enable identification
of constraints and risks on the availability of specific skillsets.

Project Types: A, B, C, and C1 based on project characterization.

Proponent: Is the organization that owns, operates, and maintains the

completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical
Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.

ProxyE: Proxy Execution implies a CMS execution strategy for capital projects
in the 10-year PXP Portfolio where the FEL development and/or EPC delivery
are potentially being outsourced to third parties.

PXP Calendar: PXP process implementation calendar produced and published

annually setting specific due dates for all PXP deliverables.

PXP Lens: Focus area through which the PXP Portfolio is reviewed and
analyzed resulting into execution efficiencies and/or cost avoidance
opportunities.

PXP Lens Champion: Organization responsible to identify opportunities under

their focus area or “lens” and for the follow up and reporting on the
implementation of these opportunities.

PXP Opportunity: A condition which has a positive effect on the Company’s

project execution efficiency and/or corporate objectives.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 16 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

PXP Process: An annual multi-organizational, forward-looking assessment of

the Company’s 3-Year Business Plan and 10-Year Investment Plan for
Engineered Projects.

PXP Recommendations: Actions proposed to resolve execution constraints,

mitigate risks, and capture opportunities identified by the PXP process.

PXP Team: A dynamic team comprised of representatives and subject matter

experts from PXP Lens Champions and subject matter experts from PXP
stakeholder organizations, but not limited to: Project Management, Project
Management Office Department, Facilities Planning Department, Industrial
Development and Strategic Supply Department, Portfolio and Decision Support
Department, Projects Procurement Department, Contracting Department,
Finance, and PXP Lens Champion organizations

RAPID® Matrix: (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide) A tool used to

clarify individuals’ responsibilities in contributing and/or making decisions. It
represents the IPT roles and responsibilities and the functional organizations.

Repetitive Project: A capital project with high frequency of occurrence in the

Investment Plan.

Terms of Reference: A document describing the VA Team formation, activities,

timeline, methodology and the focus areas for the pre-gate review.

Third-party Project: Third-party projects include capital, infrastructure, capacity

building and corporate social responsibility projects (formerly non-capital
projects) to be developed, owned and operated by a third party"
Note: For further details on 3rd Party Projects, refer to the governing document SAEP-360:
Project Planning Guidelines.

tDesign: Thrift Design is a cost-focused development and execution strategy

for projects that are repetitive and aligned with the Company’s core business.
This CMS execution strategy capitalizes on cloning or intelligent replication of a
host design while applying standards customization with enhanced focus on
modularization and standardization.

TSCR Committee: Technical Services Capital Review Committee chaired by

the Executive Vice President Technical Services and includes members that
are executives from the Technical Services Business Line.

VA Check: A limited and informal VA review.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 17 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Value Assurance Team: An independent and multidisciplinary temporary team

constituted of the Company’s subject matter experts assembled to conduct a
VA review.

5 CMS Introduction

CMS is the Company’s framework for managing and controlling project activities,
clarifying stakeholders’ roles and responsibilities, and enabling timely and
informed decision making for capital projects. CMS defines and governs the
delivery of individual projects and allows managing the Company’s overall
portfolio of projects in an integrated manner. The main CMS objectives are:

• Embrace a decision driven process maximizing value creation

• Improve project cost efficiency and schedule development through:

o Reduction in capital asset and ownership costs

o Early identification/mitigation of execution risks/constraints and capturing
execution opportunities

• Standardize the project development process

• Align the project development process with international best practices

The CMS covers the entire project development process from business planning
through project definition and execution to operations. The CMS entails following
five focus areas called the CMS Efficiency Enablers detailed in Section 6: CMS
Enablers Overview and Governance and depicted by Figure 1:

• Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)

• Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT)

• Front End Loading (FEL)

• Target Setting (TS)

• Value Assurance (VA)

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 18 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 1 - CMS Overview

6 CMS Enablers Overview and Governance

6.1 Portfolio Execution Planning

PXP is a multi-organizational, forward-looking assessment of the Company’s 3-

Year Capital Program and 10-Year Investment Plan designed to ensure
availability of adequate resources (internal & external) required to execute
capital projects and provides useful information for creating opportunities to
support the Kingdom’s economy through a focused review process named PXP
Lenses.

The key input into the PXP process is the 10-year IP from which the PXP
portfolio is composed. The main activity streams within PXP are:

1. Project Characterization

2. Execution Path Review

3. Portfolio Workforce Estimate

4. Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate

5. Portfolio Market Intelligence

6. PXP Lenses Analysis

7. Executability Review Workshop

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 19 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

In addition to these activity streams, the functional representatives from

Procurement and Supply Chain Management and Finance who are part of the
PXP team provide input on potential execution risks and opportunities from a
supply chain and financial perspective based on their review of the planned
portfolio and associated cash flows.

Governance

Portfolio Characterization:

• FPD leads the Portfolio Characterization element.

• For small size capital projects with low complexity, FPD initially tags the
candidate projects as C1 and then a committee from PMOD and FPD
makes the final determination whether the characterization of that project
will remain as C1 or is changed to C.

• All C1 projects shall be executed by the Proponent Admin Areas with the
exception of those having few IP projects or lacking the capabilities to
execute C1 projects.

Execution Path Assessment:

FPD is the owner of this Execution Path Assessment. Through this process,
projects are classified to go through one of two alternative execution paths.

Portfolio Workforce Estimate:

PMOD is the owner of the Portfolio Workforce Estimate.

Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate:

PMOD is the owner of the Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate.

Portfolio Market Intelligence:

PMOD is the owner of Portfolio Market Intelligence.

PXP Lenses Analysis:

PMOD is the owner of the PXP Lenses Analysis.

PXP Committee Meeting:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 20 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• The PXP Committee meeting is scheduled with TS Capital Review

Committee (TSCRC) for key PXP updates and decisions on an as needed
basis.

• PMOD prepares and issues the PXP Progress Quarterly update on the
progress of the recommendations on a quarterly basis.

Executability Review Workshop (ERW):

• ERW is conducted once a year and consists of multiple workshops with PXP
stakeholders.

• PMOD is the owner of the ERW.

6.2 Project Sponsor and Integrated Project Team

The PS is accountable for meeting business objectives via project scope

development and guiding the IPT to maximize investment value while ensuring
the project delivers the value promised to the stakeholders. The PS is
accountable for the scope, cost, and schedule of the project and to decide
tradeoffs between these three elements. The appointment of a senior manager
or an executive for the PS role enables informed decision making and better
stakeholder alignment toward common project objectives, thereby ensuring a
smooth transition from execution to start-up and provides leadership continuity
throughout project development.

The IPT is a temporary multidisciplinary project team that is fully committed

during project development. The IPT is steered by the PS and consists of
nominated professionals from the required functional departments under the
unified leadership of the IPT Leader and sharing the same project objectives of
scope, cost, and schedule. The IPT members represent their functional
departments as focal points with the required skill-sets to provide support during
project development.

The IPT structure promotes accountability for overall project objectives by

moving from a function-led approach to an integrated model. For further details
on the PS and IPT roles and responsibilities, refer to Section 8: Project Sponsor
and Integrated Project Team.

Governance

Project Sponsor Appointment:

At FPD’s request, the PS shall be appointed at the beginning of FEL2 by the

Admin Area or the Business Line (Proponent/Operating organization) through a

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 21 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

“PS Appointment” letter issued to FPD and PMOD. The PS for C and C1-Type
projects is usually a member of management while for A and B-Type projects,
the PS is an Executive from the Proponent/Operating organization. In some
cases, the PS can be a Vice President for a B-Type project, see Table 1.

Project Type Project Sponsor

A Executive

B Senior Vice President or Vice

President".

C, C1 Manager

Table 1 - Project Sponsor Assignment Categories

For an A-Type project or program consisting of multiple BIs or scope involved at

multiple facilities with different Business Line Proponents/Operating
organizations involved, single point accountability of the project/program
delivery shall always be maintained through the joint appointment of a single PS
by Business Line Heads or the MC. However, to facilitate the scope
development under the appointed PS, each Business Line/Operating
organization may elect to nominate focal point personnel (e.g. Manager of the
relevant operating organization) as the key stakeholder.

Appointment of IPT Leader:

Once the PS is appointed, Functional Organizations (FPD, CA) appoint

experienced SMEs as the IPT Leaders up to FEL2 from FPD, and FEL3 and
beyond from the CA. The IPT Leaders play a pivotal role in the project’s
success by leading the IPT team on day-to-day project activities and ensuring
the PS involvement (as per RAPID®) on key decisions, or where critical support
is required.

Communication Protocol:

The IPT Leader shall agree and document the communication protocol and its
frequency for FEL 2 phases with the PS to be shared with the IPT at the project
kick-off meeting. This agreement is required to be revalidated prior to Gate 2 for
FEL 3 and execution phases.

IPT Leader Participation and Transition:

FPD’s primary responsibility is to develop and freeze the scope, therefore, the
IPT Leader from FPD leads the project from the beginning of the project life
cycle to the end of FEL2 Gate/DBSP phase. After FEL2/DBSP phase is
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 22 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

endorsed the IPT Leader from the CA leads the project from FEL3 until project
close-out.
Note: Both IPT leaders must work in a focused and continually coordinated manner in order to
meet the targets agreed with the PS.

In special cases, where FEL phases are merged or developed in parallel (e.g.
FEL2/DBSP and FEL3/Project Proposal Phases), the IPT Leader from FPD
holds the accountability until the scope freeze point is achieved and agreed
among all required stakeholders regardless of the phase. However, once the
scope is frozen and formally handed over to the CA, the IPT Leader from the
CA shall assume the project leadership in FEL3 until the project close-out. For
additional information on phase merging, refer to Section 6.3.

Assignment of IPT Members:

Once the PS and IPT Leader are in place at the beginning of FEL2, functional
organizations assign experienced SMEs as IPT members at the request of FPD
in consultation with the PS and the IPT Leader. IPT members provide the
required technical support under the leadership of the IPT Leader.

Construction Agency: The Company’s Project Management administrative area

is the default CA for A, B and C-Type projects; and the Proponent’s Capital
Program Management team for C1-Type projects.

Functional Organizations Responsibility:

Functional organizations/departments shall:

• Provide support and guidance to the IPT members with function-specific

endorsement and controls on deliverables as required.

• Provide support through services and selected activities in cases where IPT
members may not have the required specific subject matter expertise.

• Provide required expertise and knowledge to perform a detailed analysis

and draft a well-founded technical recommendation.

• Develop and implement internal policies and procedures to set clear

expectations and requirements for their assigned IPT members.

• Develop and manage the resources in their own professional disciplines by

building a functional knowledge and experience base.

Continuity of Team Structure:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 23 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The Company’s organizations must ensure the continuity of the PS, IPT Leader,
and IPT members as team continuity plays an essential role in the effective and
efficient execution of the project.

Should an IPT member change be required, the functional organization shall

notify the IPT Leader of the IPT member assignment change with clear
justification which may take the form of a letter or an email. The departing
member shall prepare and submit to the IPT Leader a turnover package which
at minimum should cover the following:

• Completed work and scope elements

• List of all open and outstanding issues

• List of agreed upon disagreements and disputes with the functional

organization

• The status of ongoing work and tasks

IPT Leader changes, where unavoidable, shall be with the consultation and
agreement of the PS with a formal turnover. In such cases, an “IPT Leader
Assignment Change” notification by the functional department (FPD or CA)
shall be issued in writing to the PS and copied to PMOD.

Should the PS change, a formal PS turnover meeting should occur facilitated by

the IPT Leader. In such cases, a “PS Assignment Change” letter by the
Admin/Business Line shall be issued to the FPD Manager, the CA, and copied
to the PMOD Manager.

Conflict Resolution and Escalation Process:

The IPT members are expected to develop the project FEL deliverables in a
timely manner. However, IPT members may encounter situations where a
conflict/disagreement arises that cannot be resolved within the IPT. Figure 2
shows the escalation process to be followed. The project should continue the
phase development with the previous gate engagement decision position until
resolution is achieved.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 24 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 2 - Escalation Process

In case of conflict/disagreement between project requirements that are not

governed by Company’s standards and procedures, the IPT member shall
highlight the issue to the IPT Leader. IPT Leader in coordination with the
functional departments shall collectively work to resolve conflict/disagreement.
Note: For standards and procedure comments resolution and escalation mechanism, please
refer to SAEP-303: Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation.

Should a conflict/disagreement arise within the IPT, the IPT Leader works to
resolve the conflict in coordination with the IPT member and if necessary the
IPT member’s functional organization/department as required; after resolution
the changes are documented in written form (which may take the form of, but
not limited to email, letter, etc) and the item is closed typically within 5 working
days of initial reporting to IPT Leader.

If the IPT Leader does not resolve the conflict/disagreement within the IPT, the
IPT member should communicate the issue to his functional
organization/department. If the dispute is resolved to the satisfaction of the
functional organization/department, the changes are documented in written
form (which may take the form of, but not limited to email, letter, etc) and the
item is closed typically within 6 working days of initially reporting to the
functional organization/department.

If the conflict/disagreement is within Technical Services functional

organizations/department, it shall be routed accordingly within Technical
Services for resolution and escalated within the Technical Services Business
Line up to the Business Line Head if necessary.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 25 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

If the issue resides outside of Technical Services control and/or requires a

cross-functional resolution between Business Lines and/or any SA external
stakeholders, the PS should be engaged to facilitate resolution typically within 8
working days of initial reporting to the PS.

If the PS disagrees with Technical Services’ position or otherwise the issue

cannot be resolved, it will be presented to the Decision Maker (MC or BLC) for
evaluation and a decision.

The PS, IPT, and the functional organizations are expected to fulfil and adhere
to the roles and responsibilities as governed by the RAPID® Matrix. In the event
of unresolved disputes between the functional organizations/departments and
the PS, it is incumbent on the functional organizations/departments to follow the
escalation process as shown in Figure 2: Escalation Process.

Disputes, conflicts and key decisions falling under the PS role and
responsibilities where the PS is identified as "D-Decide" in the RAPID® Matrix
shall be sent to PS for approval and logged in the PS Decision Log. This PS
Decision Log is not intended to replace existing SA processes such as SCDR,
PCRs, etc. and its purpose is to document PS alignment in resolved
conflicts/key decisions between the IPTs and functional organizations. For
Project Sponsor Decision Form and Project Sponsor Decision Log see
Attachments I and II, respectively.

6.3 Front End Loading (FEL)

FEL is a project delivery system that leads the project development from the
project initiation phase to the execution phase and handover to Operations. It
involves developing sufficient strategic information allowing Decision Makers to
address risks and make decisions related to resource commitments and project
continuation into execution. It focuses on robust planning in the early design
development phases when the ability to influence design changes is relatively
high, and the cost to make those changes is relatively low.

Once projects are endorsed into the Company’s 10-Year Investment Plan, with
the new submittals reviewed for inclusion into the 3-Year Business Plan, the
Company’s CMS requires the implementation of front-end loading to manage
capital projects through a stage and gate process.

FEL Structure – Stage and Gate Process

The stage and gate process is a governance structure ensuring project

engineering design is progressively developed via stages/phases to allow the
asset construction to commence with minimal risk of scope changes. A stage
and gate process facilitates project development and decision-making by

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 26 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

defining the activities, deliverables, and specific objectives for each

stage/phase, and the decisions to be made at each gate by the Decision
Makers to support management tradeoffs in terms of scope, cost, and schedule.
A typical stage and gate is demonstrated by Figure 3.

Figure 3: Typical Stage and Gate

The FEL structure comprises four stages and six phases, as illustrated in Figure
4. The four stages are FEL0, FEL1, FEL2, and FEL3, and the six phases are
Initiation, Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, and Finalize FEL.

Once the phase objectives are achieved and the Decision Maker authorizes the
proposed scope, schedule, and cost for the next phase, the project is allowed to
progress beyond the gate. The number of gates varies depending upon the
project’s characterization:

• A and B-Type projects typically have three gates (GAS, Gate 2, Gate 3) –
Decision Maker is the MC
Note: In most cases, Gate 1 is deemed not required since its requirements are fulfilled by the
Business Plan approval.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 27 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• C and C1-Type projects typically have two gates (GAS or Gate 2, and Gate
3) – Decision Maker is the BLC

Figure 4: FEL Structure

Gate Objective and Phase Scope

The gate objective establishes the phase scope as illustrated in Figure 5: Gate
Objectives.

Decide on project
economic, technical and
commercial feasibilities &
identify viable alternatives

FEL 0 FEL 1 FEL 2 FEL 3

Business G1 Project Finalize

Initiation Study GAS DBSP G2 PPA G3 Execution HO Operations
Case BP Proposal FEL

Select the optimal Decide on readiness for funding

alternative from a based on final business case,
complete range of preliminary engineering and
alternatives execution strategy

Frame business Decide on project scope

opportunity aligned freeze defined in an
with Saudi Aramco approved DBSP by
strategic objectives stakeholders

Figure 5: Gate Objectives

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 28 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

FEL0 – Initiation Phase

The FEL0 Initiation Phase activities focus on framing the business opportunity,
highlighting net benefits, risks and related impacts, and potential synergies with
other projects.

FEL1 - Business Case Phase

The FEL1 Business Case phase objective validates the project business case
feasibility, and identifies a comprehensive range of alternatives (refer to SABP-
A-042 Business Case Development Guideline).
Note: For most cases, FEL0 and FEL1 phases are completed concurrently and therefore, the
objective of Gate 1 is deemed met by the acceptance of the project into the Business Plan.

FEL2 - Study Phase

The FEL2 Study phase activities focus on the analysis of the project
alternatives from a technical, site selection, commercial, risk, opportunity, and
economic sensitivity perspective with the development of supporting a study
estimate as per SAEP-25.

FEL2 - DBSP (Design Basis Scoping Paper)

The FEL2 DBSP phase objective is to freeze major scope elements and
generate a budget estimate as per SAEP-25 for the selected alternative as
defined in a stakeholder approved DBSP (definitive baselines for project scope,
cost and schedule).

FEL3 – Project Proposal

The FEL3 Project Proposal phase activities focus on the development and
finalization of the Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal as per SAEP-14,
execution strategy as per SAEP-12, and ER estimate as per SAEP-25.

FEL3 - Finalize FEL

The FEL3-Finalize FEL phase activities primarily focus on completing the

bidding phase to finalize the 56D cost estimate and validate the project key
attributes (scope, cost, schedule) alignment with the project Business Case
prior to funds authorization.
Note: The Execution Phase activities focus on Detailed Design, Procurement, and Construction
in preparation of a successful handover to operations. To facilitate smooth handover, project
teams are required to conduct “Projects Handover Reviews” as detailed in this section.

FEL Deliverable

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 29 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Each FEL phase has specific deliverables required to be developed to meet the
gate objective and requirements which are governed by Company procedures
(SAEP), standards (SAES), or best practices (SABP) and are maintained by the
responsible functional organizations. A list of the minimum required key project
deliverables can be found in Section 14: RAPID® Matrix, while typical content
and development justification for each deliverable are detailed in the CMS FEL
Book of Deliverables and Why List in PMOD’s Sharek website.
Note: The project must complete the Brownfield Readiness Indicator Checklist for “Brownfield”
Projects during FEL-2 Study Phase (refer to the BFRI Guideline on FPD’s Sharek Website).

RAPID® Matrix:

RAPID® (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide) Matrix lists the minimum
required key FEL deliverables for any project and defines the roles and
responsibilities in the CMS work processes to develop the FEL deliverables in
each phase. The RAPID® Matrix is instrumental in delivering capital projects
efficiently via clarifying the decision-making process for each FEL deliverable
and summarizing the contributors and functional organizations responsibilities
for planning and executing the FEL deliverables. In contrast to other
responsibility methodologies (e.g. RACI and similar), the RAPID® Matrix is
oriented toward the decision-making process.

Gate Readiness and Endorsement:

Each FEL phase terminates through a gate or a check point. A gate is a

decision point placed at the end of the phase where the Decision Maker
decides the next course of action (proceed, re-cycle, defer or cancel) based on
the project’s readiness to meet the minimum set criteria for the gate objective.
However, a check point (e.g. PPA) does not require engagement with the
Decision Maker, but does require approval by other stakeholders, most notably
concerned functional organizations.

The assessment of the project’s readiness to achieve the gate objective is

determined by examining all key aspects (technical, economic, commercial,
organizational, external and transversal) by a VA team consisting of corporate
SMEs through a comprehensive VA review of the project deliverables in a
documented and systemized way. Further details on the VA review process are
provided in Section 6.5.

At each gate, the project Business Case is validated, risks are mitigated, project
planning and execution strategies are assessed and approvals are obtained
from the Decision Maker. For more details on gate operation refer to the Gate
Engagement Guidelines established by each Business Line for C and C1
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 30 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

projects and S&MA (Management Committee secretary) for Type A and B

projects.

Project Handover Review

Capital Projects Handover Reviews shall be conducted for CMS projects at

several stages of the project’s lifecycle, namely FEL2/DBSP, FEL3/Project
Proposal, 60% Detailed Design progress, and 30% and 70% Construction
progress. The objective of the review is to provide a neutral perspective to the
current status of a project handover readiness to management including Project
Sponsor. The review will aid to identify and highlight any gaps or risks that may
hinder the project in terms of operational readiness and handover to achieve
proper handover planning and compliance. In addition, it serves in early
identification and resolution of handover challenges, assurance of early
stakeholder engagement and alignment. Finally, it serves as a health check for
the current condition of the project handover, and it alerts management of key
areas of concerns as well as recommend key corrective actions. Refer to Figure
6.

Figure 6: Handover Process

The Planning Phase:

The reviews for the planning phase (FEL2/DBSP, FEL3/Project Proposal) will
take place as part of the Value Assurance reviews led by CPED/Value
Assurance team with handover focus area for related deliverables as
highlighted in Section 9 Value Assurance.

The Execution Phase:

The review for the execution phase will take place at 60% Detailed Design
progress, 30% and 70% Construction progress. The review will be conducted
by the IPT lead with participation of all stakeholders. The IPT lead will identify
the high impact items and share open items with the Project Sponsor. The
tracking of open items will be the responsibility of the respective department
Project Control Division (PCD) with monitoring of PMOD/ Project Optimization
Division (POD). For details of the review process refer to PMOD/CPED
reference documents on PMOD’s webpage – “Project Handover Review
Framework”.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 31 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Governance

FEL1 Completion:

The projects fulfil FEL1/Business Case Phase objective by securing the

endorsement through the Corporate Staff Review and subsequent inclusion of
these projects in the approved Business Plan. Therefore, Business Plan
approval fulfils Gate 1 engagement requirement.

Should the project encounter significant changes in the scope, cost and/or
schedule baselines after Business Plan approval, the IPT is required to engage
with PMOD/CPED to establish the need to repeat the preceding gate
engagement prior to proceeding with FEL2 activities.
Note: It is incumbent on the IPT and the PS to inform PMOD/CPED and seek guidance for such
changes. Supporting documentation is required for the changes.

Gate Engagement:

For C and C1-Type projects based on project nature, conditions, and VA

recommendations, the PS determines whether to engage the BLC at Gate
Alternative Selection (GAS), or Gate 2, thereby limiting the total number of gate
engagements with the BLC to two (2) throughout the FEL.

If the PS decides not to engage with MC/BLC for cause and not in-line with
prescribed guidelines, PMOD shall share the VA outcome (findings and
recommendations) with the Decision Maker as an informational item.

For justified cases where a physical gate engagement cannot be scheduled to

establish the gate decision for C and C1-Type projects, an offline gate
engagement is permitted by routing a white paper with the approval of the
respective Committee Chairman. The white paper shall be initiated by the PS,
concurred by the PMOD Manager, and approved by the Decision Maker (BLC
Chairman). For offline gate engagement requirements through the white paper,
refer to Attachment III.

Changes to RAPID® Matrix:

RAPID® Matrix changes are governed by a strictly defined process, especially

PS role and responsibilities changes which shall be approved by the Executive
Vice President Technical Services, see Figure 7.

PMOD owns the RAPID® Matrix governance process and is responsible for
engaging with the Executive Vice President of Technical Services for the
RAPID® Matrix Management of Change process.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 32 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Changes shall be concurred by all relevant stakeholders in the form of an

official letter to PMOD. This applies for any and all changes, e.g.:

• Adding, deleting, or renaming FEL deliverables

• Changes to roles for the PS, IPT Leader, IPT, supporting organization roles
and responsibilities (R, A, P, I, & D)
Note: All changes requested shall not conflict with currently published SAEPs and SAESs.

Upon review through the Management of Change process, PMOD will present
changes to the Executive Vice President of Technical Services for the final
approval in case of impact on the Project Sponsor role and responsibilities.

PMOD shall communicate to all stakeholders the approved and rejected

changes and, on behalf of Executive Vice President of Technical Services,
ensure relevant SAESs and SAEPs are updated by their respected owners, as
necessary.

Figure 7: RAPID® Governance Process

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 33 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Deliverables Endorsement:

The responsible organizations sign-off on the project deliverables in accordance

with the RAPID® Matrix is acceptable either through a hardcopy or electronic
acknowledgement (e.g; EPM, E-Approval).

The approval of multiple deliverables with the same responsible

organizations/individuals such as PS and IPT Leader can be obtained through a
single sign-off.

Phase Merging:

For specific C1-Type projects with complexity score of 3 and below, the IPT
Leader may recommend merging of phases FEL2/DBSP and FEL3/Project
Proposal with a scope freeze point at 30% Project Proposal led by FPD IPT
Leader, developed and approved in accordance with SAEP-1350. The scope
freeze point shall be mutually agreed between FPD, CA IPT leaders, endorsed
by the PS and documented in the VA plan.

Commencement of FEL3/PP Phase Activities Prior to FEL2 Gate Engagement:

In cases where a project requires advancement of specific FEL3 activities into

FEL2 prior to Gate 2 engagement, the IPT Leader shall provide to PMOD a
formal endorsement or equivalent communication from the PS, CA, and FPD
allowing IPT to continue or commence specific FEL3 activities with risks
identified and mitigated. The advanced FEL3 work activities before Gate 2
engagement:

• Shall not change/impact the scope freeze achieved at the end of

FEL2/DBSP phase.

• Should be a continuation of study or work commenced during FEL2/DBSP

phase to be completed by the end of FEL3.

Deliverables Revalidation:

If a project deliverable (in its final version) was approved in a preceding FEL
phase and changes considerably in terms of conclusions, recommendations, or
choices, the deliverable shall be revised including the necessary endorsements
from all required stakeholders and shall be included in the current FEL phase
deliverables (with clear depiction of its impact on the project scope, cost and
schedule) for VA Review and subsequent re-approval at the upcoming gate.

MC/BLC Decision Re-validation:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 34 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

For A & B-Type projects the PS must repeat the preceding gate to secure the
appropriate gate approval before proceeding with the current phase activities if
the current project phase encounters any of the following:

• Significant project scope changes resulting in cost deviation beyond the set
cost estimate confidence level of the preceding phase.

• A decision must be made contrary to the decision endorsed at the previous

gate(s)

• Change in the selected optimal alternative post FEL2/Study phase

Note: In C and C1-Type project cases, the PS must secure the appropriate gate approval for the
current phase if any of the above becomes applicable for the project.

6.4 Target Setting

The TS process challenges the IPT’s creativity to achieve an ambitious, but

realistic primary project delivery target with supporting goals in terms of cost
and schedule that outperform the Company’s historical performance of
comparable projects, while being competitive with industry. As a minimum, the
IPT is expected to demonstrate that all efforts are exerted to achieve the set
target and supporting goals throughout project development.

Target setting is a leading indicator and a tool to optimize project scope by

aligning the project key objectives throughout the different development FEL
phases and to align the project with the industry benchmarks. Project primary
delivery target and supporting goals shall be endorsed by the PS.

The TS process steps (Primary Driver Selection, Target Setting Meeting, and
Target Evaluation) are repetitive for each phase, however, the process evolves
with the maturity of the project development throughout the FEL process as
shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9.

For further details on TS process and associated roles and responsibilities,

refer to Section 10: Target Setting.

Figure 8: TS Process for A and B-Type Projects

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 35 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 9: TS Process for C and C1-Type Projects

Governance

• Process Ownership: The TS process owner is FPD and PMOD manages the
TS preparation of the required data repositories.

• Target Setting Meeting: The Target Setting Meeting shall be conducted no

later than 30% development of the applicable phase for A, B, and C type
projects, and at 60% of DBSP for C1 projects.

• For C and C1-Type projects, if FEL2/DBSP phase is merged with

FEL3/Project Proposal phase, TS process shall be applied at FEL3.

• By default, cost is the primary project driver and schedule is secondary,

unless justified by IPT and approved by PS to be reversed.

6.5 Value Assurance

VA is a process aimed at ensuring the project maintains or increases its value

by identifying project weaknesses, shortcomings and related risks, and
accordingly providing alternatives and mitigation actions as appropriate. The VA
process supports the project to deliver in line with the set targets meeting FEL
stage and gate process requirements and implementing best practices.

The VA process is implemented through a focused, structured, and rigorous

analysis via, the VA Review of project deliverables, performed by an
independent and qualified multidisciplinary team, constituted of Corporate
SMEs, before each gate and/or key decision(s) to examine all aspects of a
project from a diverse, holistic, and cross discipline perspective to:

• Support the IPT on specific disciplines by providing technical and business

analysis and solutions for project value enhancement.

• Identify gaps, risks, and opportunities to provide necessary

recommendations to the IPT and the PS.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 36 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Provide an independent project readiness assessment for the gate

engagement through highlighting risks, opportunities, and gaps to support
the Decision Maker’s decisions.

The VA Process and associated VA Review does not:

• Substitute functional controls and responsibilities of normal project QA/QC.

• Perform an audit on project.

• Make decision to hold a project from accessing the gate.

• Substitute PS, IPT and functional organizations’ roles in optimizing scope,

cost and schedule.

For more VA Process details and how to conduct a VA Review, refer to Section
9: Value Assurance.

Governance

Process Ownership:

The VA process owner is PMOD/CPED.

VA Review Pre-Requisite:

• Submittals of completed project deliverables by the IPT with all functional

comments incorporated.

• Endorsement of the project deliverables by all required stakeholders per the

RAPID® Matrix.
Note: In special cases, where the endorsement from PMOD on Cost Estimate Deliverable is not
readily available prior to the FEL-2/ DBSP VA review kick-off, the VA review should commence
provided the Cost Estimate and Target Setting are highlighted as incomplete until the endorsed
Deliverables are provided.

Closure of VA Findings:

For each phase the IPT is responsible for closing the VA findings raised as a
result of the VA Review, provide feedback on the closure status to the VA
Leader once all the findings are addressed. This also applies to the open
findings which are agreed to be closed in the next phase.

Number of VA Reviews:

The required VA Reviews are typically as follows (refer to Figure 4):

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 37 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Three (3) VA Reviews for A and B-Type projects, and one VA Check at the
end of FEL3/Finalize FEL phase.

• Three (3) VA Reviews for C and C1-Type projects, and one VA Check at the
end of FEL3/Finalize FEL phase.

Timing for VA Review during FEL3:

All efforts should be made to conduct Gate 3 VA Review after completing 100%
Project Proposal, or prior to solicitation of the bids from the market.

VA Review for Special Cases:

The VA Review is performed for the following specific cases of:

• An accelerated project being developed and following the framework

provided in Section 11: Accelerated Capital Projects.
Note: The number and the timings of the required VA Reviews shall be in accordance with
Section 11.

• A digital project being developed and following Section 12: CMS for Digital
Projects.
Note: The number and the timings of the required VA Reviews shall be in accordance with
Section 12.

• A project following “CMS Process for Project Replication and Execution

Outsourcing”.
Note: The number and the timings of the required VA Reviews shall be in accordance with
Section 13.

• A mega A or B-Type project or a program broken down into smaller scope

packages managed under individual Budget Items.
Note: The BIs under a program may not follow the same timeline for FEL development and
may require separate gate engagements with the Decision Maker. In such cases, multiple
VA reviews may be required.

• A phase officially merged with the preceding phase:

o In case of merging FEL2/Study and FEL2/DBSP phases the first VA

review shall be conducted at the end of FEL2/DBSP phase (scope freeze
point) prior to Gate 2 engagement.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 38 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o In case of merging FEL2/DBSP and FEL3/Project Proposal phases if the

scope freeze point is agreed to be at the end of FEL2/Study phase, the
first VA review shall be conducted before GAS engagement.

o In case of merging FEL2/DBSP and FEL3/Project Proposal phases, if the

scope freeze point is agreed to be during FEL3/Project Proposal phase
(e.g. at 30% Project Proposal), the first VA review shall be conducted
before GAS engagement. The second VA review shall be conducted at
the agreed scope freeze point based on mutually agreed deliverables
(between the VA Leader and the IPT Leader). These deliverables shall
be completed minimum at FEL2/DBSP phase completion level.
Note: Each of the above cases shall require a VA Review during FEL3/Project Proposal
phase followed by VA Check at the end of FEL3/Finalize FEL phase.

• Special assessment requested by the Company’s other organizations (e.g.

FPD, S&MA) prior to seeking guidance and/or endorsement on a decision
by the Decision Maker (MC).

• An advanced or progressive VA Review focusing on a particular aspect of

the project prior to making key decisions (e.g., Contracting Strategy
approval by the Services Review Committee, Prior Approval Expenditure
Requests, Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with third party entities
and Utilities Supply Implementation Agreements, Technology Selection,
etc.).

These advanced/progressive VA Reviews:

• Provide timely VA input to the IPT and/or the PS prior to making a key
decision on a particular aspect of the project.

• Provide interim status update for previous VA and gate recommendations.

• Should be carried out on the completed work (study, assessment and/or

deliverable) pertaining to a particular aspect of the project.

VA Review Re-validation

In case of a major change in the project key parameters (scope, cost, or

schedule) after completion of the VA Review and prior to the upcoming gate
engagement, IPT Leader shall notify the VA Leader with the change and submit
updated/impacted deliverable(s) for earlier completed VA Review re-validation.

Escalation Process

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 39 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

In rare case of disagreement between the PS and the Corporate VA Team on

any VA finding and associated recommendation that cannot be resolved before
the gate:

• The Corporate VA Team shall highlight within the VA report and in the
Decision Support Package delivered to the Gate Keeper the VA finding and
associated recommendation which has not been agreed by the relevant
IPT/PS.

• The PS/IPT shall summarize the rationale for the project issues which have
been not agreed with the VA to be presented at the gate.

• During the gate, the eventual disagreement will be analyzed and resolved
directly by the Decision Maker (MC or BLC).

VA Process Timeline:

Following is a general guideline for the timeline of the steps involved in the VA
process. This timeline may change depending upon the complexity of the
project and for cause:

• VA Plan needs to be completed no later than 6 weeks after phase

commencement.
Note: The VA Plan shall be initiated by the IPT Leader for VA Leader agreement through
EPM.

• For complex projects or program with multiple BIs the IPT Leader shall
organize an FEL planning workshop, facilitated by the VA Leader and
attended by the key IPT members and the IPT Leader(s), at the beginning of
each phase.

• Terms of Reference need to be completed at least 4 weeks prior to planned

VA Review date.

• VA Review execution is expected to take typically up to 19 working days for

an A or B-Type project/program and up to 12 working days for a C or C1-
Type project depending upon IPT compliance to the agreed VA plan timeline
for deliverables submittal, planned meetings, and IPT response on raised
VA observations.

• In case of a delayed response over the agreed VA Plan timeline from the
IPT on the raised VA queries and/or observations, the following escalation
protocol shall be triggered by PMOD:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 40 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o One (1) working day delay over the plan: email from PMOD/CPED/PVAG
Unit Head to IPT Leader Unit Head

o Three (3) working days delay over the plan: email from PMOD/CPED
Division Head to IPT Leader Division Head

o Five (5) working days delay over the plan: email from PMOD Manager to
IPT Leader Functional Manager

7 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)

7.1 PXP Overview

Figure 10 is an overview of the PXP process. The key input into the PXP
process is the 10-Year Investment Plan from which the 10-Year PXP Portfolio
of Engineered Projects is composed. The major activity streams within PXP are
as follows:

7.1.1 Characterization

Classification of projects, based on size and complexity, to identify

the planning and execution approach for each project in the portfolio.
Projects types are characterized as A, B, C or C1 type.

7.1.2 Execution Path Review

Projects are flagged to be executed in one of two alternative

execution paths, namely tDesign or ProxyE as outlined in section
7.2.3.

7.1.3 Portfolio Workforce Estimate

Projected forecast of Company workforce (Regular and Supplemental

Manpower) required to develop and execute all projects in the
portfolio, detailed by professional role and year. Additionally, this
demand is compared against the manpower plan from Human
Resources Information System to identify any constraints.

7.1.4 Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate

Projected estimate of materials and services in both quantities and

values to identify the types and timing of the most critical resources
required to deliver the portfolio.

7.1.5 Portfolio Market Intelligence

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 41 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The product from the planning, collection, processing, analysis and

evaluation of information on the project market environment, in light
of the portfolio. MI enables decision makers by providing timely,
targeted information.

7.1.6 PXP Lenses Analysis

Focused review of the portfolio to identify potential capital cost

avoidance opportunities under various focus areas which are referred
to as “PXP Lenses”.

7.1.7 Executability Review Workshop (formerly Dynamic Portfolio

Management)

Process that supports decision-making, by the PXP Committee on

the recommendations required to address portfolio execution
constraints, mitigate portfolio execution risks and capture portfolio
execution opportunities.

In addition to these activity streams, the functional representatives

from Procurement and Supply Chain Management and Finance who
are part of the PXP Team will provide their input on potential
execution risks and opportunities from a supply chain and financial
perspective based on their review of the planned portfolio and
associated cash flows.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 42 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 10: PXP Process Overview

7.2 PXP Process Description

7.2.1 PXP Initialization: 10-Year Investment Plan

The main input into the PXP process is the Company’s approved 10-
year IP. Strategy & Market Analysis, working with various
stakeholders, manages the development of the IP. The IP
submissions are subjected to scenario analysis and are presented to
Senior Management over multiple iterations. At the end of this
process the Company’s 10-year IP is approved.

The PXP provides input to S&MA on the development of the 10-year

IP with respect to any additional or enhanced submittal requirements
based on the findings from the completed PXP analyses reported to
the VP of Engineering Services.

Additionally, during the development of the IP, based on its review of

IP submissions, PXP provides input regarding portfolio execution
opportunities and portfolio execution risks. This is provided to S&MA
for consideration prior to finalization of the IP. Portfolio & Decision
Support Department is the PXP team member responsible for
providing the finalized IP to the PXP team each year as per specified
timelines in the PXP calendar. This deliverable contains planned
appropriations and expenditures for projects to be funded from years
1-10 of the IP as well as planned expenditures on projects which
have already been funded. The planned (to be funded) and the active
(already funded) projects will be clearly differentiated in the
deliverable. The deliverable should also contain all the relevant
information required for PXP analysis to the extent available and as
agreed between PMOD and P&DSD. Where necessary, PXP
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 43 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

organizations may use information from other source systems on

master data attributes to supplement the analysis. Additionally, in the
case of joint ventures included in the IP, cash injections and
investments should be clearly differentiated from joint development
projects for the purposes of composing the portfolio.

After receiving the 10-year IP from P&DSD, PMOD prepares the 10-
year PXP Portfolio that is composed of engineered projects as
defined in Section 7.2; and shares it with the PXP Team to
commence their analysis under their specific activity streams.

After the draft IP is composed, optimization of the 3-year BP gets

underway with FPD leading the exercise. FPD and PMOD agree on
the final dataset to be used for PXP analysis no later than early
August each year which captures all the BP optimizations up to that
time. Information from this dataset is shared with PXP Lens
Champions as required to update their analysis. Where changes to
the 3-year BP are made after this point, the PXP Team will evaluate
these changes and determine if they are significant, requiring update
to PXP analysis and lenses.

The various activities to be performed under the PXP process are as

below.

• Characterization of the portfolio

• Execution Path Review

• Portfolio Workforce Estimate

• Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate

• Market Intelligence

• PXP Lenses Analysis

• Executability Review Workshop

7.2.2 Characterization of the Portfolio

The portfolio characterization refers to the classification of the portfolio

based on size and complexity to determine the best approach to
planning and execution of the projects as well as identify the
appropriate execution agency and CMS governance. FPD is leading
the characterization process.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 44 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

As part of the characterization exercise, FPD ensures every project in

the portfolio is mapped to the appropriate project type and subtype as
per MSS codes. This is required for the preparation of the Portfolio
Materials and Services estimate.

7.2.2.1 Input

The main input to characterization is:

1- The Company’s portfolio.

2- The C1 organizations assessment provided by PMOD

to assess the readiness of the proponent construction
agency as needed.

Based on the project information in the portfolio as well as

the subject matter expertise of FPD engineers, FPD
performs or confirms/revises the characterization for each
project in the portfolio. A characterization tool is used to
determine the project size cluster and project complexity
based on size threshold values and complexity criteria.

7.2.2.2 Process

In general, projects are characterized into four categories

A, B, C, C1 and are based on project size cluster
threshold values and project complexity criteria and is
depicted in Figure 11. The three thresholds to determine
the project size cluster are:

• Small: $4-100MM

• Medium: $100-500MM

• Large: >$500MM

The complexity cluster is determined based on an

evaluation of 11 criteria in 3 groups:

Execution Complexity

• Interfaces with existing facilities and systems

• Interdependence with other projects

• Location remoteness

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 45 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Technology complexity and maturity

• Security and safety issues

• Environmental impact

• Likelihood of scope changes

Commercial Complexity

• Sensitivity to external market conditions

• Impact of delays

Stakeholder Complexity

• Organizational complexity (no. of internal departments

involved, no. of different contractors)

• Complexity of external stakeholders (e.g., presence of

JVs, involvement of local communities / landowners)

• The Portfolio Characterization matrix depicts the

breakdown into clusters by project size and
complexity.

Figure 11: Portfolio Characterization Matrix

Projects are scored for each criterion as “1,” if the

complexity criterion is present in the project, or “0,” if the

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 46 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

complexity criterion is not present in the project. After

scoring each individual criterion for each project, FPD
sums up the scores for each of the 11 criteria, to obtain a
total score between 0 (least complex) and 11 (most
complex) for the project.

The total score is then compared with the following

ranges to determine the complexity level of the project:

• Low Complexity: scores 0,1,2,3

• Medium Complexity: scores 4,5,6

• High Complexity: scores 7,8,9,10,11

After completing the initial characterization for all capital

projects by FPD, the characterization committee reviews
and endorses the outcome.

Later changes to project cost and complexity impacting

the characterization post Capital Program endorsement
should be brought by the IPT Leader to the committee’s
attention for re-characterization. The committee decision
whether to keep or change the current execution agency
should address minimum interruption to project
engineering and project execution including synergy
parameters in scope and location remoteness for optimal
executability of project activities and team efficiency.

Changes to the characterization matrix may be required

from time to time to remain relevant to the portfolio of
projects. Such changes will be recommended by FPD
and reviewed and agreed by the Characterization
Committee.

7.2.2.3 Output

At the completion of the characterization process, FPD is

responsible to provide the characterized list of projects in
the portfolio. This deliverable will contain the
characterization value for every project in the portfolio as
discussed and agreed by the Characterization
Committee.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 47 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The output of the completed characterization process is

used to:

• Determine sponsorship level

• Determine project governance and deliverables

requirements

• Identify Construction Agency and prepare Portfolio

Workforce and Materials and Services estimates

All C1 projects shall be executed by the proponent Admin

Areas except in case of those Admin Areas with few
projects through the IP or lack the capabilities to execute
C1 projects. These Admin Areas should align with PM to
assume the execution responsibility or the project will be
deferred out of the 3-year Business Plan.

7.2.3 Execution Path Review

After the Portfolio Characterization process, projects are subjected to

an Execution Path Review process where projects are flagged to be
executed for one of two Alternative Execution Paths; namely tDesign
or ProxyE as outlined in Section 7.2.3.2. Projects in the portfolio that
are not flagged in one of these alternative executions are expected to
go through regular CMS. The leader of the Execution Path Review is
FPD and as part of the Execution Path Review exercise, FPD
ensures projects in the portfolio that have the potential to be highly
repetitive are mapped to the appropriate project execution path
strategy based on a number of project attributes. This is in part
required for the preparation of the Portfolio Materials and Services
estimates.

7.2.3.1 Input

The main input to Execution Path Review is the

Company’s portfolio with the project characterization
information. Based on the project information including
the characterization, FPD in consultation with CSD
performs the Execution Path Review based on the
criterion outlined in the following section and identifies the
list of projects that will go through the two execution paths
(tDesign or ProxyE). The PXP portfolio that has the
project characterization and execution path classification
is then shared with the PXP Team.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 48 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

7.2.3.2 Process

In general, the portfolio will be subjected to Execution

Path Assessment using the criteria shown in Figure 12.
Less complex projects will be flagged to be executed into
one of two execution path options. These are for:

• Thrift Design Execution

• Proxy (P2E) Execution

Execution Path Review

Core Business
10 years PXP IP CMS
with
Characterization

No No

Yes Yes
Execution Path Is BI Scope Yes Is it Yes Is the design Yes
Thrift Design
Assessment Core? Repetitive? Replicable?

No

None-Core Business
`

Is it suitable No
Is it No Proxy Execution
for Capital
Repetitive? Lease?

Yes Yes

3rd Party

Figure 12: Execution Path Assessment

7.2.3.3 Output

At the completion of the Execution Path Review, FPD is

responsible to provide the list of projects in the portfolio
with their execution path mapping to PXP Team. This
deliverable will contain the characterization and execution
path for every project in the portfolio as agreed by the
Characterization Committee and Execution Path Review
exercise outcome. The output of the completed execution
path process is used to:

• Determine Sponsorship level

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 49 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Determine execution path

• Determine project governance and deliverables

requirements

• Identify Construction Agency

7.2.4 Portfolio Workforce Estimate

This consists of the preparation of the Company’s internal workforce

quantities required to execute the portfolio. Comparison of this
demand with the Company’s planned manpower is used to identify
gaps between the estimated demand and the planned supply of
Company manpower. PMOD/PSSD is the owner of this process step.
Company manpower refers to regular staff, supplemental manpower,
PMC and PMS staff who work on the Company’s engineered
projects.

7.2.4.1 Input

The input into the Portfolio Workforce Estimate is

available portfolio information including active project
expenditures from previously funded projects as well as
expenditures on Maintain Potential projects.

7.2.4.2 Process

PMOD uses tools and models that are developed for this
purpose. At the end of the Workforce Estimate process,
PMOD generates an estimate of the number of internal
workforce quantities required for each project, broken
down by:

• Professional role (Project Engineer, Project Manager

etc.)

• Year

• Project Workforce Pools, i.e., regular employees,

supplemental manpower, PMCs and PMSs.

PMOD then cumulates the individual project demand to

get the total portfolio demand by professional role, year
and workforce pool.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 50 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

PMOD then compares the portfolio demand with the

labor supply plan based on information from Human
Resources to estimate constraints in internal manpower
requirements.

Portfolio Workforce Estimate is prepared for all internal

resources required to execute the project including but
not limited to PM, Engineering Services staff and
Facilities Planning staff who work on project delivery in
professional roles.

7.2.4.3 Output

The output of the Workforce Estimate process for PXP is

the following:

• Summary Report explaining the work done, identifying

the data sources, the tools and process used and the
findings and conclusions of the Portfolio Workforce
Estimate deliverable.

• A spreadsheet clearly showing the details of workforce

requirements calculations sorted by year, workforce
pool and professional role. Planned supply of
manpower from the Company’s HR systems should
be mapped to the professional role or discipline, the
year and the workforce pool. Comparison of the two
sets of data should clearly identify the gaps or
constraints by year, workforce pool and professional
role.

7.2.5 Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate

This step consists of the preparation of the projected materials and

services quantities required to execute the portfolio.
PMOD/C&MRD/MRU is the owner of this process step.

7.2.5.1 Input

The inputs into Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate

are described in Section 7.2 and include the
characterized list of projects in the prescribed format.

7.2.5.2 Process

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 51 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

In order to prepare the Materials and Services Estimate,

PMOD uses internal processes, estimating
methodologies and tools and may use inputs from other
organizations as required. At the end of the exercise,
PMOD produces deliverables as described below.

7.2.5.3 Output

The output of the Materials and Services Estimate

process to PXP is a Summary of Key Quantities
(materials and services) to execute the portfolio sorted by
year.

7.2.6 Market Intelligence

This step consists of the preparation of MI to provide insights on

current market environment. PMOD/C&MRD is the owner of this
process step.

7.2.6.1 Input

• Portfolio of projects (active and planned)

• Stakeholder challenges/opportunities

7.2.6.2 Process

In order to prepare market intelligence, PMOD utilizes

various resources to:

• Assess the project business environment

• Utilize tools/models/other

Market analysis will provide insights into the market

landscape with respect to the projected availability or
constraints in key execution resources (engineering or
construction workforce, specific commodities and
engineered equipment). It will also highlight any potential
market risks which may need to be mitigated.

7.2.6.3 Output

The output of MI is a summary of the market landscape,

a heat map showing the forecasted constraints in key
execution resources as well as other execution risks and

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 52 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

opportunities highlighted by the market intelligence

findings. Suggested recommendations may also be
included as part of the MI output in order to mitigate the
identified risks and constraints.

7.2.7 PXP Lens Analysis

PXP Lens analysis is the examination of the portfolio to identify

opportunities for cost avoidance and and/or other value-add benefits
under specific lenses. Therefore, any opportunity which brings value
by improving quality, operability, safety or by compressing schedule
may be identified after duly considering the tradeoffs with cost. These
are then assessed through the project’s FEL leading to the optimal
decision in each case.

7.2.7.1 PXP Lenses Overview

The PXP Lenses Framework is composed of 7 PXP

lenses. For each PXP lens the objective and the
Champion Organization are as follows:

• Synergy (FPD): To identify synergy opportunities per

SABP-A-41.

• Technology (Chief Engineer/TMD): To tag new

technologies that addresses the Company’s known
technical challenges and/or improve the quality and
longevity of the Company’s assets and/or provide
increased economic benefits. This lens will also
address portfolio execution optimization benefits by
exploring new installation concepts, for example, the
implementation of advanced modularization
techniques, Licensor Selection optimization and
Project Execution Technologies.

• Standards & Codes (Chief Engineer/EK&RD): To

identify candidate projects to replace Company
standards by more cost-efficient international
standards and codes and/or enhance Company
standards and codes towards more efficient ones.
Moreover, this lens will explore design standardization
techniques to reduce portfolio costs and schedule
during project development and delivery phases; and
also enhance the technical quality of completed
projects and reduce operating costs.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 53 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Energy Optimization & Green Energy (P&CSD): To

support the Corporate Energy Policy, through
enhancing energy efficiency of projects, supporting
green buildings, utilizing renewable energy and
reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

• De-carbonization & Circular Economy (EP): To

conduct an annual assessment on the Investment
Plan for engineered projects to identify opportunities
that will lead to a reduction in environmental CO2 and
raw material use, closed loops for materials and water
conservation; all of which aim at supporting the overall
carbon footprint reduction of the projects in the
portfolio. The aim is to:

1. Remove carbon from the atmosphere through

offsetting and Green Energy Program initiatives

2. Recycle waste material and explore possibilities to

transform it into a resource (energy, irrigation
water, etc.)

• Outsourcing (FPD): To off-load non-core capital

projects to third parties with the aim to optimize the
utilization of Company’s resources.

• IKTVA (ID&SSD): Refers to the implementation of

Saudization targets by setting early targets for
individual capital projects to comply with the
Company’s IKTVA initiatives.

7.2.7.2 Identification and Assessment Process

The key input into the PXP lenses identification process

is the portfolio and detailed information on the projects to
the extent available including characterization and
Execution Path Review identifications. The portfolio is
sent to the PXP Lens Champions who filter it based on
determined criteria and analyze it (along with their teams)
to identify potential opportunities and candidate projects
under their respective lenses. These identified
opportunities are then discussed by the PXP Team
during the Executability Review Workshop and the final
PXP analysis will be shared with the Sr. VP of
Engineering Services for endorsement.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 54 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The finalized lenses opportunities are communicated by

PMOD to the PXP Lens Champion organizations. As the
functional organization responsible for FEL1 initiation and
assignment of IPT leader, FPD is responsible to
communicate the identified opportunities to the IPT
leaders as soon as they are assigned to a project so that
these opportunities are assessed on a timely basis.

The following steps ensure the identified opportunities

are evaluated and captured.

• The IPT Leader plans the evaluation of the identified

opportunities.

• The IPT member from PXP Lens Champions supports

and monitors the evaluation and development.

• The functional organization endorses deliverables and

evaluation/implementation of design review checks
prior to concluding the phase VAR at the end of each
phase.

• The IPT records all identified opportunities in specific

FEL deliverables and then assesses them during
project development. The IPT is responsible to record
the details of the assessment as well as the final
decision on the identified opportunities in relevant FEL
deliverables. These deliverables are reviewed by VA
teams during the VARs and any identified
opportunities not assessed by the IPT are highlighted
in the VA Report.

The PXP Lens Champions also monitor the

implementation of the identified opportunities under their
respective lens by establishing a process for interfacing
with the IPTs and review of relevant deliverables. The
requirements of the specific deliverables will be
established and communicated by the relevant PXP Lens
Champion and documented in governing documents as
applicable.

This process may not apply to the PXP Lens for IKTVA in
the manner described above. Specific General
Instructions and/or procedures apply for IKTVA
implementation and PXP only reports IKTVA results for

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 55 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

the portfolio as a subset of the Company’s cumulative

IKTVA results.

7.2.7.3 Implementation of Identified Opportunities

The implementation of identified opportunities is tracked

during the FEED by the respective PXP Lens Champion
who are required to report on a quarterly basis to the
PXP Stakeholder and by PMT during the execution
phases. PMOD sets up and manages the PXP Quarterly
Reporting process and has developed a real-time
dashboard to provide an overview of implementation
results.

An implementation plan is completed by each PXP Lens

Champion immediately following the endorsement of the
PXP lenses opportunities for each cycle and updated for
each quarter thereafter until completion. This plan
contains the following information.

• Names of the PXP Lens Champion organization and

team member organizations

• Implementation Status Update summary

• Cost Avoidance results (quantities and values)

• Implementation Schedule (with start and end dates)

• Implementation risks and concerns

7.2.7.4 Benefits of Quantification for PXP Lenses Identified

Opportunities

The PXP Lens Champions shall provide an indicative

value of the potential cost avoidance (by year) and/or
other benefits or potential tradeoffs offered by the
identified opportunities using appropriate methodology
and clearly stated assumptions.

Actual benefits achieved will be tracked on a quarterly

basis against the identified benefits with a view to
capturing lessons learned in order to maximize the value
from the lenses process and refine the identification
process and potential value add for each subsequent

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 56 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

cycle. The captured Lessons Learned shall be added to a

Lessons Learned Knowledge Base for PXP to facilitate
continuous improvements for future PXP activities.

7.2.7.5 Management of Change for Lenses and Domains

For each PXP cycle, the lenses to be implemented are

determined based on the baseline of approved lenses
and domains as endorsed by the Sr. VP of Engineering
Services

Changes to the lenses and their domains are governed

by the following change management process:

1. Using the MoC form (Attachment IV), any changes

(additions or deletions) to the lenses and their
domains may be proposed by the Champion
Organization at any time and the recommendation for
change shall be signed by the respective manager of
the submitting organization.

2. As the PXP process owner, PMOD will review the

submittal and will concur the recommendation based
on the merits of the proposed change.

3. The Admin Area Head of Engineering Services has

the approval authority for the change.

4. The PXP framework for each lens can also be

changed based on direction from the TSCRC
Chairman.

When a new lens is proposed, it is initially presented as a

concept to the relevant stakeholders and if there is
agreement, the framework is further detailed and
developed. When the framework is completed, it shall be
submitted using the MoC form.

The framework for each lens typically identifies a

Champion Organization and contains a defined process
flow, inputs, outputs, deliverables and RAPID® for the
PXP identification. The framework also addresses the
assessment of these opportunities through the FEL and
specifies the impacted deliverables.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 57 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

7.3 PXP Lenses Opportunities Implementation Governance

For each PXP cycle, the lenses to be implemented are based on the baseline of
approved lenses and domains as endorsed by Management or the TSCR
Committee Chairman. The approved lenses, domains, governing procedures
and the FEL deliverables are listed below in Table 2. Any changes to any of
these lenses’ attributes shall be submitted as a change. IPTs are responsible to
evaluate and implement the PXP opportunities mapped against their capital
projects, prepare the deliverables required and ensure the functional
organizations endorse the deliverables per the CMS requirements.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 58 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Lens Domains Procedures Deliverables

• Digital Transformation

• Environmental, Health & Sustainability

• Information Technology SAEP 74 (OED) Tech. Select. Report

• Inspection
TECHNOLOGY

• Maintenance Management
• Supply Chain Management
SAEP-74 (OED) Tech. Select. Report
• Modularizations SAEP-360 (FPD) MDA Study
SAEP-1350 (FPD) MDA DBSP
SAEP-74 (OED) Tech. Select. Report
• Process Eng. & Control (Incl. Licensed Tech.)
SAEP-81 (P&CSD) Process Design
• Project Execution Technologies SAEP-74 (OED) Tech. Select. Report
SAEP-74 (OED) Tech. Select. Report
• Materials Eng. & Equip (incl. Non-Metallic)
SAEP-1350 (FPD) Non Metallic Study
• Design Standardization
STANDARDS
&CODES

SAEP-301 (CE) Customizing Standards & Specifications

• International Standards & Codes Alignments SAEP-302 (CE) Standards update
SAEP-14 (PMOD) New standards

• New Standards Publications

EO&GE Study
• Industrial Energy Efficiency EO&GE DBSP
EO&GE

EO&GE PP
SAEP-42 (P&CSD)
• Renewable Energy
• Green Buildings
• Green House Gas emissions Co2 KPI Reported through EIA
IKTVA

Procurement Strategy and Material

• Localization Procurement Manual
Procurement Plan

• Scope SAEP-360 (FPD) PSD (Scope)

SYNERGY

• Location PEP (location)

SABP-A-41 (FPD)
• Execution Synergy BP (Both)
OUTSOURCING

SAEP-360 (FPD) Alternative Selection

• Third Party

GI30.001 (NBD) BP

GHG Emission Reduction

Decarbonization & Circular

Flaring/Methane Emission Minimization Alignment between SAEP-13 (EP) and SAEP 42

CO2 KPI (Output from EO&GE Lens)
(P&CSD)
• De-Carbonization Energy Efficiency
Economy

Renewables

Offsetting (afforestation, reforestation, algae) SAEP-13 (EP) EIA

• Water Conservation Recycling and Reuse of waste water SAEP-13 (EP) EIA

• Waste Management Recycling, Reuse and Transformed waste SAEP-13 (EP) EIA

Table 2 - Lenses, Domains, Governing Procedures and the FEL Deliverable

7.4 Executability Review Workshop (Dynamic Portfolio Management)

ERW is a collaborative process which brings together all outputs from the
preceding steps of PXP for discussion by the PXP Team to identify major
findings, risks, constraints and opportunities. PMOD consolidates all
deliverables which are then brought forward to the PXP Team for discussion
and to develop and agree on recommendations to address the portfolio
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 59 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

execution constraints, mitigate the risks and capture identified opportunities.

PMOD is the owner of this process step. As part of the ERW, one or more
Portfolio Execution Risk Management workshops may also be conducted.

7.4.1 Input

The inputs into the ERW process are:

• 10-year Investment Portfolio

• Characterization outputs

• Portfolio Workforce Estimate

• Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate

• Market Intelligence reports and supporting heat maps

• PXP Lenses identified opportunities from the PXP Lens

Champions

Annually, PMOD will determine the timeline for PXP implementation

with the submittal dates of the various PXP deliverables and publish
the PXP calendar on its website.

7.4.2 Process and Outputs

PMOD works closely with all PXP stakeholder organizations to

complete the following activities.

• Portfolio analysis, consolidation and interpretation

o Analyze the portfolio to develop insights about key projects, MI

focus areas, geographical spread of projects, types of projects
etc.

o Review the reasonableness of projects’ milestone dates and

estimates based on historical and/or benchmark information as
available.

o Review all deliverables to ensure all information is provided as

required.

o Seek clarification and explanations as required and integrate

all deliverables to identify constraints, risks, opportunities and
actions which may have been missed.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 60 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o Identify key risk areas related to mega projects and other

projects for further analysis and discussion

o Identify portfolio optimization opportunities for discussion

o Summarize and prepare consolidated PXP analyses, MI

extracts, consolidated risks, constraints and opportunities for
further discussion with the PXP Team.

• Integrate PXP Lenses deliverables

Integrate lenses inputs from various champions to identify any

conflicts (e.g. potential outsourcing opportunities being
proposed for execution lens) which may need to be discussed
and managed. Take a consolidated view of the individual
lenses inputs to identify any additional Portfolio-level
opportunities. Conduct workshops as needed to discuss any
revisions and align the PXP Team and PXP Champions on
lenses outputs and recommendations.

• Portfolio Risk Assessment

o Prepare Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat Map based on

the previous steps. Conduct workshops involving all PXP
Team Members, facilitated by qualified risk management
professionals to discuss portfolio potential risks, constraints
and opportunities. Conduct risk evaluation based on agreed
Risk Assessment Matrix and agree on PXP risk classification
and prioritization.

o Discuss and complete the PXP Risk Heat Map based on the
completed risk assessment matrix to identify the most critical
portfolio risks and constraints. Agree with all PXP members on
the output of the risk workshops to be taken to the ERW to
discuss risk ownership and proposed mitigation to agree on
recommendations.

o Any findings from portfolio risks assessment which are specific

to individual projects will be carried over into the first Project
Risk Management exercise conducted for the project and also
considered for inclusion into the submittal requirements for the
IP development and/or optimization of the BP.

• ERW Workshops

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 61 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o Arrange and conduct ERW workshops to discuss the impact of

MI findings on the executability of the projects in PXP profile
as well as discuss and prioritize the identified constraints, risks
and opportunities.

o Discuss possible mitigation actions for the most critical

risks/constraints and agree on proposed recommendations.

o Agree on the shortlist of risks/constraints and opportunities

and recommendations to be presented to the PXP Committee
for endorsement. Each recommendation must be supported by
an estimate of potential cost avoidance or financial benefit with
assumptions clearly noted.

7.5 Endorsement of PXP Analyses

The PXP team is responsible for the completion of the annual PXP analyses
and shares the potential PXP recommendations and potential PXP lenses
opportunities with the Sr. VP of Engineering Services for his endorsement prior
to implementation.

In case the Sr. VP of Engineering Services decides to request concurrence

from Technical Services Sr. VP on the outcome of PXP analyses, a meeting will
be scheduled with the TSCR Committee meeting to arrange for such
concurrence.

The PXP analyses are usually completed annually in October with specific
dates determined based on the Corporate calendar. Moreover, the objective is
to complete the PXP analyses prior to the MC meeting in order to provide the
MC with updates on major PXP findings and/or recommendations regarding the
executability of the portfolio.

7.6 Follow-up and Reporting

PMOD will be responsible for all PXP progress reporting.

• Log actions and decisions against every proposed PXP recommendation.

• Liaise with Champions for all endorsed PXP recommendations and PXP
Lens opportunities to prepare their implementation plan and follow up on
implementation progress until completed.

• Provide the PXP Stakeholder with periodical updates on implementation

results. PMOD will use a real-time dashboard detailing implementation

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 62 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

results for each PXP recommendation and each PXP Lens at project BI
level.

7.7 PXP Sequence of Activities

Table 3 below shows typical PXP activities and summarizes key PXP
deliverables as a result of the annual PXP cycle. Specific calendar dates will be
agreed with the PXP Team.

Sr.
Activity Responsible
#

1. Draft 10-Year Investment Plan P&DSD

2. Release 10-Year Portfolio PMOD

3. Portfolio Characterization Completed FPD/PMOD

4. Portfolio Workforce Estimate deliverables PMOD

5. Portfolio Materials and Services deliverables PMOD

6. Market Intelligence deliverables PMOD

PXP Lens
7. PXP Lenses opportunities
Champions

8. Executability Review Workshop (Milestone) PMOD

9. PXP Analyses Report PMOD

10. Endorsement of PXP (Milestone) PMOD

Updates to the PXP Stakeholders on PXP

PXP Lens
11. Recommendation and PXP Lens implementation
Champions
results.

Table 3: Typical PXP Activities of the annual PXP Cycle

8 Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT)

This section explains the PS and IPT role and responsibilities with key enablers
for success within their role.
Note: For all governance related discussion on PS, refer to SAEP-17 Section 6.2.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 63 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

8.1 Project Sponsor

8.1.1 Project Sponsor Role and Responsibilities

The PS role complements the traditional roles and responsibilities of

the core functional organizations like Project Management and
Engineering Services.

The PS always has a voice in what the project needs to accomplish

and how it will be accomplished should compromises be required.
Subject to a proper level of checks and balances (Target Setting and
VA), the PS chooses between the technical and strategy alternatives
presented by the IPT by weighing the benefits, costs, and risks of each
alternative against the project’s business goals, priorities, and
constraints.

The PS decides the project’s scope of work while ensuring compliance

to the Company’s established standards, procedures, and processes.
With this authority, the PS has sufficient control over the project scope
to ensure project success.

The PS is expected to have sufficient knowledge of the drivers for

successful project planning and execution to guide the IPT and serve
as a credible advocate of the Saudi Aramco project delivery work
processes.

During FEL2 DBSP Phase the PS:

• Safeguards the implementation and compliance to the Company’s

established standards, procedures, and processes including FEL
stage and gate governance.

• Confirms and clarifies project business requirements and feasibility.

• Establishes, approves, and monitors project targets, e.g., cost,

schedule, and scope through the Target Setting work process.

• Guides decisions on project scope, strategy, facility quality, and

schedule.

• Supports the IPT Leader in resolving issues/risks threatening

project success.

• Enforces the discipline necessary to properly plan and execute the

project to avoid rework of FEL phase/stage and/or major late design

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 64 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

changes.

• Ensures IPT alignment and team continuity is maintained and

supports the IPT Leader in interactions with functional departments
to ensure their direct involvement in the project’s activities and
deliverables.

• Supports the IPT in the identification of objectives, scope, and

strategies and alignment among the internal and external
stakeholders.

• Approves or rejects changes to the project within the boundaries of

the Company’s established standards, procedures, and processes.

• Ensures a VA Review is performed at the end of each project phase

to assess if the project meets the phase completeness criteria
based on completed project deliverables.

• Ensures the Decision Support Package is complete as per

established gate engagement requirements and submitted timely to
the Gate Keeper to schedule the gate engagement with the
Decision Maker.

• Presents to the Decision Maker reliable and unbiased information

about project status including outstanding VA Review findings and
recommendations, and ensures the IPT developed a
mitigation/action plan to address all open findings with a plan for
resolution.

• Oversees and manages conflict resolution and the escalation

process throughout project development phases.

• Oversees the interfaces with all internal and external stakeholders

to resolve disagreements and disputes (which may take the form
of, but not limited to email, letter, meeting minutes, etc.).

• Supports the IPT Leader and ensures the CMS process by

addressing obstacles threatening project success and ensuring
implementation of appropriate mitigation actions for the project
identified key risks.

• Ensures validity of the project’s Business Case including the

project’s economical, commercial, and technical feasibility
assessments.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 65 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Ensures all required FEL2 studies are completed and thoroughly

analyze all available options/alternatives to guide the determination
for the most optimal options/alternatives by the end of FEL2/Study
phase.

• Safeguards project scope freeze at the end of FEL2/DBSP phase

by selecting and defining the most optimal options/alternatives in
an approved Design Basis Scoping Paper by all stakeholders.

Once the Decision Maker endorses the Business Case objectives and
the project scope freeze at Gate 2 FEL2/DBSP Phase, the project
proceeds into FEL3/Project Proposal Phase. The key FEL3 phase
objectives (Project Proposal and Finalize FEL) are to advance the
planning, definition of engineering, and execution strategy to meet the
ERA requirements (±10% estimate) while ensuring the engineering
design to-date integrity and safeguarding against any potential
changes that can cause project disruptions in the Execution Phase.

Unless a significant market change occurs, the company’s strategic

direction changes, or the project’s cost and schedule estimates
change, projects are not expected to be cancelled at the end of FEL3
even on an infrequent basis, since significant resources and funds
have already been exhausted to develop the project up to FEL3.

The IPT leadership transitions from the Facilities Planning Department

to the CA at the endorsement of the FEL2/DBSP phase after Gate 2.
However, the PS maintains the role of facilitating trade-offs, making
decisions in case of meaningful project variances and supporting the
IPT in resolving any project execution challenges throughout the
project duration.

During FEL3 Phases (Project Proposal and Finalize FEL) the PS:

• Ensures the engineering design to-date integrity, as well as the

execution strategy and prepares the project for ER Funding.

• Supports the IPT Leader and guards the CMS process by

addressing obstacles threatening project success and ensuring
implementation of appropriate mitigation actions for the project
identified key risks.

• Obtains approval for changes to business objectives after verifying

project technical, commercial and economic viability.

• Monitors the updates for the project performance against earlier

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 66 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

established cost, schedule, and scope targets/goals through the

Target Setting work process.

• Approves or rejects scope changes within boundaries of the

Company’s established standards, procedures, and processes.

• Support the IPT in maintaining alignment with project’s internal and

external stakeholders.

• Ensures the contracting strategy and procurement plans for

procuring the CA contracts are technically and commercially
adequate, functionally endorsed, and adequately followed through.

• Ensures operations’ preparation and readiness for commissioning

and startup.

• Facilitates the signature cycle of the Mechanical Completion

Certificate.

• Ensures safe startup of the facilities, delivery of the project results,

and timely closeout of the project.

Despite the IPT leadership change after Gate 2, the PS remains

responsible for providing sufficient oversight, guardianship and
direction.

8.1.2 Key Attributes of the Project Sponsor Role

Maintaining Stakeholder Alignment

The PS oversees the project internal and external stakeholders

through an established stakeholder management process and
associated stakeholder management plan. The PS is responsible to
ensure IPT’s adherence to the project stakeholder management plan
and to timely secure stakeholder agreements and safeguard meeting
business objectives by addressing issues as they occur, managing
conflicting interests, and fostering appropriate engagement in project
decisions and activities.

Ensuring Quality of Decisions and Completeness of Deliverables

The PS is accountable to facilitate well-informed project decisions at

the gate with the DM through ensuring completeness and quality of
supporting deliverables required before the gate.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 67 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The PS is not expected to personally review and assess the quality of

each deliverable, however, he is responsible to monitor the progress
of required deliverables and take actions if progress falls behind. If
the required deliverables are incomplete, the PS decides to proceed
forward or delay the associated gate engagement provided a VA
Review is conducted prior to the gate engagement to establish the
project’s readiness based on the level of completeness and quality of
the required deliverables.

The PS and the IPT Leader are responsible to address any

deficiencies identified by the VA Review and share with the Decision
Maker at the gate any outstanding VA findings, associated
recommendations, and IPT mitigation/action plans to address the VA
findings.

Project Sponsor Involvement by Project Phase

Figure 13 shows the expected PS involvement levels during each

FEL phase. The conceptual level of effort in each phase is shown
relative to the PS’s maximum involvement.

Figure 13: PS involvement during different FEL phases

The PS’s involvement starts at the beginning of FEL2/Study phase

after the project’s endorsement in the Company’s Business Plan. At
this point, enough work is completed to frame the business
requirement and to test the viability of the project against a
conceptual scope of work.

The next step is to refine the business objectives and evaluate the
identified feasible alternatives in the FEL2/Study phase. To avoid

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 68 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

rework, it is crucial the PS provides input and direction to the IPT

Leader and the IPT regarding the business objectives and range of
alternatives well before the completion of FEL2/Study phase.

The PS’s involvement peaks during FEL2 (Study and DBSP phases)
when business objectives and project scope are finalized. The PS
actively participates in these activities, which are driven by the IPT
Leader.

As the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase progresses, the PS’s

involvement decreases as the IPT Leader is more responsible in
driving the execution toward meeting the project’s objectives. Unless
major deviations arise from earlier agreed scope and/or Project
Execution Plan requiring the PS’s direct attention, the PS’s
involvement gradually becomes minimal during the Execution phase.

8.2 Integrated Project Team Role and Responsibilities

The Integrated Project Team is a temporary entity composed of an IPT Leader

and members with the skills, talents, knowledge, and expertise needed to
efficiently and effectively plan, develop, execute, and deliver Saudi Aramco
projects. The IPT contains all the stakeholders to contribute towards making
key project decisions and includes a clear decision-making hierarchy. The
premise is an empowered team with shared project objectives jointly make
better decisions faster than a loosely organized team of separate functions.

IPT members cover a defined set of roles, with associated responsibilities which
are defined in the RAPID® Matrix (Section 14: RAPID® Matrix). IPT members
shall provide all capabilities required to develop the project FEL deliverables
prescribed by each FEL phase.

In addition, the IPT ensures the effectiveness of progressive design reviews by

functional departments, completes all FEL studies before project Execution
phase begins, and aids in the selection of contractor SME’s post-award. IPT
members play an important role to support the PS at each gate with the
required information and completed deliverables.

The roles of the IPT belong to four main categories which are: leadership,
planning-focused, execution-focused and technical support and coordination
(Figure 14). According to the size, complexity and risk exposure of the project,
IPT members can be appointed on a part-time or full-time basis according to
project requirements.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 69 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 14: IPT Member Role

8.2.1 IPT Leader Role and Responsibilities

The leadership role and associated responsibilities remain similar

under FPD and CA IPT leadership: guiding the project scope
definition, the technical design basis, and project planning and
execution. Below is an IPT Leader’s role and responsibilities list to be
used as a guideline to ensure project success:

• Lead the IPT day-to-day activities.

• Define which deliverables are performed in-house, and which are

contracted to GES+/contractor/PMC.

• IPT leader, in consultation with IPT members, may determine

discipline-specific design reviews based on any identified areas of
GES+ weakness during design development (refer to SAEP-303).

• Schedule regular meetings with the PS and the IPT members and
log meeting minutes.

• Document the communication strategy protocol and frequency to

be used with the PS.

• Identify IPT membership and organizational requirements for each

FEL phase and define their roles and responsibilities by
developing a matrix and description.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 70 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Establish clear stakeholder functional organizations interface plan

for each phase to be aligned with team continuity and coherence.

• Lead and direct project planning and execution efforts while

protecting CMS governance and established requirements.

• Manage and maintain project objectives in line with the project

targets and business case objectives while resolving
disagreement among IPT embers according to the established
escalation process.

• Ensure project readiness for value assurance by completing all

applicable phase deliverables with the necessary endorsement
from the stakeholders as per the RAPID® Matrix prior to
commencing the next phase.

• Develop and manage project milestones and dates for each FEL
phase and integrate project components.

• Monitor variances and manage deviations from the agreed scope,

cost, and schedule and obtain approval at appropriate level of
authorization.

• Ensure compliance to relevant procedures and standards and

obtain a waiver if it is required according to the project
specifications upon agreement with the main stakeholder.

• Develop and maintain a control folder for deliverables and their

subsequent updates/changes with traceability and version control.

• Manage project specific deliverables and ensure the quality is

consistent among all the deliverables and the functional
organizations are aligned through the functional reviews, thereby
endorsing the FEL deliverables as per the RAPID® Matrix.

• Ensure conducting all required functional control activities to fulfill

the project requirements, risk management, and mitigations.

• Ensure the PS is fully up to date on project status and continually

aligned on changes to project key attributes (scope, cost,
schedule).

• Ensure continuous project alignment with established primary

target and supporting goals for the project as agreed with the PS
in the project charter.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 71 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Provide necessary support and services to the PS in completing

all gate engagement requirements.

• Work with the Value Assurance Leader to close findings and

develop the Decision Support Package for the Gate Keeper
including the presentation for the Decision Maker (MC or BLC).

8.2.2 Integrated Project Team Members Roles and Responsibilities

The IPT members cover a defined set of roles with associated

responsibilities, providing all capabilities required to develop the
project deliverables prescribed by each FEL phase. The RAPID®
Matrix defines the segregation of roles and responsibilities across IPT
members representing functional organizations/departments for each
project deliverable. Below is an IPT member’s roles and
responsibilities list to be used as a guideline to ensure project
success:

• Develop project scope, cost, and schedule while protecting CMS

governance and established requirements.

• Meet project objectives with optimum cost, schedule, and quality.

• Comply with company standards, procedures, guidelines, and

GIs.

• Provide technical and progressive design reviews and support

throughout the project phases and resolve design discrepancies
and non-conformities before participating in all design e-reviews.
In addition, participate in all progressive design e-reviews (refer to
SAEP-1350/SAEP-14/SAEP-303 for more details).

• IPT members may assist in their respective discipline to review

the selection of contractor SMEs as advisory if requested by the
CA through the IPT leader of the phase to leverage the SMEs
technical expertise and capitalize on the ES specialties,
supporting the contractor review and selection process.

• Support timely decision making by the PS and Decision Maker.

• Develop project deliverables according to the RAPID® Matrix and

in compliance with relevant underlying SAEPs and SAESs. Also,
apply best practices where applicable.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 72 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Engagement on day-to-day activities based on the project

requirements.

• Represent, coordinate, and liaise between their functional

organization/department and the IPT.

• Ensure inclusion of the key considerations of all operational

elements into project development, e.g., commissioning and
startup.

• Ensure project safety-related aspects are considered and develop

project-specific safety procedures for the contractors to follow.

• Ensure the procurement of materials and equipment for the

project as defined by the Procurement & Supply Chain Manual.

• Provide technical input on environmental compliance of selected

deliverables.

• Ensure the project maintains conformity to the accepted corporate

contracting policies and procedures as defined by the Contracting
Department.

• Ensure inspection, quality assurance, and quality control

procedures are defined and followed by contractors, and ensure
inspection of materials and equipment during delivery and
acceptance.

• Perform cost analysis and establish financial controls for

monitoring reimbursable contract costs on materials procurement,
project design, and construction.

8.3 Roles of Functional Organizations/Departments in Capital Projects

The functional organizations/departments are the key stakeholders involved in

the project development. While the functional organization/department is
responsible to provide support as required, this is not a shift of accountability,
as the IPT remains fully responsible for the project results.

IPT members are empowered to highlight to their functional department any

unresolved conflict/disagreement between project requirements and the internal
standards and procedures of functional department early in each FEL phase.
Also, IPT members must be in line with the RAPID® Matrix roles and
responsibilities with full engagement with their functional organization.
Moreover, it is essential functional organizations/departments minimize

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 73 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

changes/turnover in assigned IPT members to ensure the stability of projects

and optimal outcomes.

The functional organizations/departments represent the core of the capital

project planning and execution process. Functional organizations/departments
involvement in the capital project process can be summarized by the following
responsibilities:

• Management of project portfolio

• Direct involvement in individual project activities and deliverables

• Development and management of guidelines, procedures, standards, and

knowledge

• Management of the resources in the professional disciplines

8.4 IPT Structure Across Project Phases

The IPT concept is designed to assemble the required skills and competences
to apply the FEL process. For this reason, the composition of the IPT evolves
across the phases of the FEL process, as needed, and the IPT Leader ensures
the most appropriate competencies are available in each phase to perform the
required activities to produce the prescribed deliverables.

8.5 RAPID® Responsibility Matrix Roles Definition

The RAPID® (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide) responsibility matrix

is a tool used to clarify individuals’ responsibilities in contributing to/making
decisions. RAPID® provides streamlined decision making and reduces costs
through reducing labor time, focusing management behavior, and eliminating
duplicative decisions.

The RAPID® Matrix highlights each project deliverable where each stakeholder
takes action and specifies the action required:

Recommend: There is only one Recommend. This is normally the

process owner and have credibility with all Input and Decide components. They
synthesize the input (incorporating context) and ensure appropriate individuals
are consulted.

Agree: Used only in selected decisions. They formally approve a

recommendation and have the authority to challenge the Recommend. If the
Agree and Recommend cannot align, the Decide breaks the deadlock.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 74 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Perform: This is the individual or group to execute the Decision and is

responsible for doing so promptly and effectively. Depending on the decision,
there can be one or multiple Performers in each process. In the RAPID® Matrix,
the IPT “Perform” roles are not indicated since it is only the decision making
roles and responsibilities of concern, and not the execution of the decision.

Input: Provides factual input to the recommendation. There are usually

multiple Input elements. Input is assigned only to individuals with critical insight
to the decision (to avoid Input proliferation).

Decide: There is only one Decide. They make the decision and commit
the organization to action. More than 90% of the time, Decide supports
Recommend. If Decide belongs to a “group,” there needs to be a clarification of
how it is exercised (e.g. majority vote).

8.6 General IPT Responsibilities in Project Deliverables Development

According to the RAPID® Matrix, each activity is marked as “Recommend,

Agree, Perform, Input, and Decide”. This section describes the responsibilities
for the RAPID® role, thereby the actions required by each assigned person or
group under the RAPID® Matrix. The main activities in the development of a
single deliverable are:

• “R” Recommend an initial draft of a deliverable

• “I” Provide input to the development of a deliverable

• “A” Provide agreement to a deliverable

• “D” Decide on a deliverable

• “P” Perform the decision on a deliverable

Refer to Section 14: RAPID® Matrix for deliverable-specific RAPID® Matrix roles
assignment.

“Recommend” (an initial draft) a Deliverable:

The responsible party in charge of this activity in each deliverable is to:

• Obtain the most updated version of the deliverable template and applicable
reference procedures

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 75 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Identify the activities required to develop the deliverable and the necessary
interfaces within the IPT and functional organizations/departments

• Request the Input from other IPT members and representatives appointed
by functional organizations/departments

• Circulate the deliverable draft among all those who provided input to capture
all final comments

• Distribute the deliverable for agreement, if necessary, to the functional

organizations/departments; discuss the content and obtain required
agreement

• Finalize the deliverable and send it for final decision

The development of this FEL deliverable activity is marked as

“Recommend”.

“Input” to a Deliverable:

The stakeholder in charge of this activity is expected, for each deliverable, to:

• Timely provide any input, as requested from the stakeholder leading the
Deliverable development

• Review the Deliverable draft and provide any comments, as applicable

The development of this FEL deliverable activity is marked as “Input”.

“Agreement” to a Deliverable:

The stakeholder in charge of this activity is expected, for each Deliverable, to:

• Review the Deliverable provided by the stakeholder leading the

development of the Deliverable

• Discuss any content if required

• Provide agreement as requested from the stakeholder leading the

Deliverable development

The development of this FEL Deliverable activity is marked as “Agree”. It

is used only for selected Deliverables.

“Decide” on a Deliverable:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 76 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The stakeholder in charge of this activity is expected, for each Deliverable, to:

• Review the Deliverable provided by the stakeholder leading the Deliverable

development.

• Make the final decision and approve the Deliverable

According to the RAPID® Matrix, this activity is marked as “Decide”.

“Perform” (the Decision on) a Deliverable:

This is the individual or group assigned to execute the decision and is

responsible for doing so promptly and effectively. Depending on the decision,
there can be one or multiple performers in each process. In the RAPID® Matrix,
the IPT “Perform ” roles are not indicated since it is only the decision-
making roles and responsibilities of concern, and not the execution of the
decision.

9 Value Assurance

This section governs the Value Assurance process implementation during the
FEL phases to support project governance and decision-making at the gate.
Note: For all governance-related discussion on Value Assurance, refer to Section 6.5.

The VA process is implemented through a structured and rigorous analysis, the

Value Assurance Review, performed by an independent multidisciplinary team
before each FEL gate and/or key decision(s) to examine all aspects of a project
from a diverse, holistic, and cross discipline perspective.

Figure 4 provides a typical representation of the VA process within the FEL

phases in relation to the gate engagements.

The distinct objective of each gate as shown in Figure 5 establishes the scope of
each FEL phase and the required VA Review. This comprehensive review of the
selected project deliverables determines the readiness for the gate by examining
all key aspects (technical, economic, commercial, organizational, external, and
transversal).

The following sections highlight the objective and the focus areas of the VA
Review for each gate.

9.1 Assurance Review Scope & Focus Area

9.1.1 FEL1 (Gate 1)

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 77 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

FEL1 is complete when the project’s Business Case is justified and

approved as part of the Business Plan through the demonstration of
its economic, technical, and commercial feasibilities along with
effective management of identified project risks through proper
mitigations, and a comprehensive range of viable options/alternatives
are identified to be studied further in the next FEL2/Study Phase.
Note: Refer to Section 6.3 for details on exception for FEL1 (Gate 1) VA Review.

Table 4: Typical Gate 1 VA Review Focus Areas

Typical G1 VA Analysis

Assess the project scope objective, particularly verifying business objectives

are clearly understood, project plans are realistic and documented in the
Prerequisite

Project Charter

Verify a comprehensive complete range of viable options/alternatives are

identified at this stage in order to pursue their further studies in the next
FEL2/Study Phase

Other prerequisite aspects assessed by the VA Team

Review the economic model underlying assumptions (i.e., main cause for the
project economic viability) to assess if all economic data and required
analyses are complete for supporting the Business Case
Economic

Verify if cost estimation is developed for initial and life cycle cost ensuring the
accuracy of +/-50%

Verify financial data (Capital Expenditure (CapEx), Operating Expenditure

(OPEX), revenues, others) and analysis support project’s affordability

Other economic aspects assessed by the VA Team

Verify if schedule estimation was developed (Level I) and is realistic

Assess adequacy of scope definition for the base case (the main
Technical

option/alternative under consideration for the project)

Verify consistency, completeness and accuracy of the project basic data

requirements

Verify a complete list of viable project sites are identified and the criteria (in
terms of accessibility, restrictions, land use permit, others) are defined and

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 78 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G1 VA Analysis
approved to analyze and guide selection of the optimal site during next FEL
phase

Verify key Health, Safety, Security and Environment (HSSE) issues and their
management aspects are identified and necessary plans developed to further
validate and access the associated risks

Verify whether relevant Value Improving Practices are identified and planned

Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check project commercial characteristics (contractors, vendors, utilities,

partners, JVs, etc.) are well considered as part of the decision based FEL
Commercial

process

Verify required market studies are foreseen to identify all variable contracting
and procurement strategies for the project

Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team

Verify Target Setting is conducted to establish competitive target and goals

based on internal/external benchmarks to improve historical performance and
align/perform better than the industry

Verify a Risk Management plan including holistic project overall risk is

Transversal

implemented, major risks are identified and associated with a mitigation plan

Verify lessons learned from previous projects are collected and implemented

Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA,

regulations, social, etc.) are well considered

Verify the Stakeholder Management plan is adequately updated with complete

identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of
External

influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with

clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper
involvement

Other external factors assessed by the VA Team

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 79 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G1 VA Analysis

Check the Project Team organization is consistently resourced along with

clear identification of roles and responsibilities
Organization

Check internal organizations are properly activated for the required activities
and their comments and suggestions are taken into consideration

Verify an IPT is formed and fully implemented including clear roles,

responsibilities, organization, communication, etc.

Assess the IPT internal dynamics (refer to TDI VIP outcome)

Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team

9.1.2 Value Assurance Review Scope & Focus Areas – Study (GAS)

FEL2/Study Phase is complete when all studies required to thoroughly

analyze all options/alternatives are conducted and finalized along with
effective management of identified project risks through proper
mitigations to guide the selection of the most optimal option/alternative.

Table 5: Typical GAS VA Review Focus Areas

Typical GAS VA Analysis

Verify recommendations of previous gate review are addressed

Review the project scope, objectives, and related project plans to verify they
are updated and realistic
Prerequisite

Check for any significant changes to the previously defined project scope
which may cause increase in costs, schedule, or have other significant
impacts on the whole project

Assess if economic evaluation is thorough and covers all alternatives

Test the assumptions used for performing the project economics evaluation
for the different alternatives and the basis to select the most optimal
Economic

option/alternative

Verify specific analysis on the asset lifecycle cost is taken into consideration

Verify if study cost estimate is developed with an accuracy in accordance with

SAEP-25

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 80 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical GAS VA Analysis

Other economics aspects assessed by the VA Team

Verify project schedule estimation is developed and is realistic in

consideration with other project interdependencies

Check scope definition for all alternatives is developed and sufficient to

compare them technically, economically, and commercially

Verify alternative concepts are fully evaluated to select the proposed

development option which is aligned with project objectives and maximizes
the opportunity value

Verify all viable alternative solutions are considered

Verify selection criteria are well established and understood for selecting an
alternative
Technical

Verify consistency, completeness, and accuracy of the project basic data

requirements

Assess if the technology selection is based on thorough studies of

recommended technologies

Ensure the final site selected is consistent with the analysis performed in
previous FEL phase(s) and thus is confirmed to be the optimal site in terms of
accessibility, restrictions, land use permit, and other approved site selection
criteria

Verify key HSSE issues and their management aspects identified during
earlier phase are updated, validated, assessed, and necessary steps taken to
mitigate the associated risks

Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices are implemented and their
results considered

Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check project commercial characteristics (contractors, vendors, utilities,

Commerci

partners, JVs, etc.) are considered as part of the decision based FEL process

Verify the proposed preliminary Contracting Strategy is consistent with the

al

market study outcome and suitable for the alternative selected

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 81 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical GAS VA Analysis

Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team

Verify the project is performing within endorsed Target and goals

Verify the Risk Management Plan is updated adequately (by updating the risk
register as an outcome of scheduled risk workshop, team meetings focused
Transversal

on risks, mitigation actions status updates, identification of additional major

risks and associated mitigation plans) and the project’s overall risk exposure
improved compared to the previous Gate

Verify lessons learned from previous projects were collected and

implemented

Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA,

regulations, etc.) are considered

Verify the Stakeholder Management plan is adequately updated with

External

complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of

influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with
clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper
involvement

Other external factors assessed by the VA Team

Check the IPT organization is adequately resourced to support the following

phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities

Check internal organizations are properly activated for the required activities
Organization

and their comments and suggestions are taken into consideration

Assess the IPT internal dynamics (refer to TDI VIP outcome)

Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team

9.1.3 Value Assurance Review Scope & Focus Areas – FEL2 (Gate 2)

FEL2 is complete when the most optimal option/alternative is selected

and adequately defined in an approved Design Basis Scoping Paper

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 82 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

by all stakeholders (to freeze the scope) including implementing

competitive target and goals to achieve capital efficiency for the project
and effective management of identified project risks through proper
mitigations.

Table 6: Typical Gate 2 VA Review Focus Areas

Typical G2 VA Analysis

Verify recommendations of previous gate reviews are addressed

Review the project scope and objectives and related project plans to verify they
Pre-requisites

are updated and realistic

Check for significant changes to the previously defined project scope that may
cause cost increase, schedule changes or have other significant impacts on the
project

Assess the economic data for supporting the Business Case and check, where
applicable, if the changes in the scope and future potential business
environment need to be taken into consideration
Economic

Test the assumptions used for performing the project economic evaluation

Verify if the updated economic evaluation is coherent and reasonable

Verify if budget cost estimate is developed with an accuracy in accordance with

SAEP-25 and is coherent with the budget defined

Other economics aspects assessed by the VA Team

Verify if schedule estimation was carried out and is realistic

Verify the updated design data requirements are consistent (related to scope,
feedstocks, products, utilities, process options, simulation and calculations
Technical

results, HSSE, operability and reliability, and referenced codes, standards,

procedures and materials specifications) and confirm the required changes from
previous phase are captured and approved

Evaluate the concept selected incorporates operations and maintenance

requirements

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 83 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G2 VA Analysis

Verify the final site selected is appropriate in terms of facilities, physical

interfaces among facilities, required technologies/capabilities

Verify the most cost-effective plot plan/layout (overall) for the proposed
facility/equipment is identified and selected without compromising safety,
environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance,
operation, and construction requirements

Verify the selected scope properly considered the constructability related issues

Check if dedicated activities for ensuring operational readiness are outlined

Test if the scope is ready to be frozen and optimal while considering coherence
with the defined Business Objective
Technical

Verify key HSSE issues and their management aspects identified during earlier
FEL phase(s) are updated, validated, assessed and necessary steps are taken
to mitigate the associated risks

Verify if the draft EIA was developed and submitted to EP for approval.

Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) are implemented and
their results considered
Handover:
o Check if dedicated activities for ensuring operational readiness plan are
outlined
o Ensure completeness of the early planning for handover requirements
o Assess if vendor handover early requirements are met
Check if the project team has proper handover alignment with all stakeholders
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check the project commercial characteristics (commercial, permits, approvals)

Commercial

are considered

Review the proposed Contracting Strategy to establish if the proposed strategy

maximizes value to the Company based on the nature of the project and its risk
profile

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 84 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G2 VA Analysis

Review the Procurement Strategy and verify it is adequate to support project

execution

Verify project is performing within endorsed target and goals

Verify the Risk Management Plan is updated adequately (by updating the risk
register as an outcome of scheduled risk workshop, team meetings focused on
risks, mitigation actions status updates, identification of additional major risks
Transversal

and associated mitigation plans) and the project overall risk exposure is
improved compared to the previous Gate

Verify lessons learned from previous projects are collected and implemented

Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA,

regulations, etc.) are well considered

Verify the Stakeholder Management plan is adequately updated with complete

External

identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of

influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with
clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper
involvement

Other external factors assessed by the VA Team

Check Project Team organization is consistently resourced to support the

following phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities
Organization

Verify lessons learned from previous projects are taken into consideration by
the Project Team

Check internal organizations are properly activated for the required activities
and their comments and suggestions are taken into consideration

Assess the IPT internal dynamics (refer to TDI VIP outcome)

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 85 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

9.1.4 Value Assurance Review Scope & Focus Areas – FEL3 (Gate 3)

FEL3 is complete when all pre-requisites to authorize funds for

execution (ER approval) and phase objectives are met including the
completion of an endorsed engineered scope package, bidding
process, final cost estimate, execution and operational planning,
business case and project target/goals validation etc. are completed.

Table 7: Typical Gate 3 VA Review Focus Areas

Typical G3 VA Analysis

Verify recommendations of previous VA Reviews are implemented

Verify the project plans are updated, realistic and align with the project scope
Prerequisites

and objectives

Check if the Project Execution Plan is consistent with the defined project
objectives (Business Case need, Target Setting)

Check for significant changes to the previously defined project scope in

FEL2/DBSP which may cause cost increase, schedule changes or have other
significant impacts on the project

Assess the economic data used for supporting the final Business Case is up-to-
date and based on actual data (actual cost and Project Completion Schedule,
updated demand supply forecast, updated Corporate Energy Values,
sensitivities related to project life cycle); Check where applicable, if the changes
in the scope and future potential business environment need to be taken into
Economic

consideration

Test the validity of assumptions used for performing the project economics
evaluation

Verify if the updated economic evaluation is coherent and reasonable

considering overall project risk at project and enterprise levels

Verify if cost estimate is developed with an accuracy of +/-10%

Technic

Verify if schedule estimation at level III is developed with realistic

basis/assumptions (incorporating resource loading, critical interfaces as
external commercial milestones, coherent logic, clearly defined critical path,
al

Saudi Aramco procurement cycle for long lead items and alignment with defined

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 86 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G3 VA Analysis
and agreed shutdown periods where applicable etc.), ready to be used as
Project Control Schedule (Project Completion Schedule 0) and aligned with the
bid package milestones

Verify the consistency of the updated design data requirements (related to

scope, feedstock, products, utilities, process options, simulation and
calculations results, HSSE, operability and reliability, and referenced codes,
standards, procedures and materials specifications) and confirm any required
changes from previous phase are captured and approved

Verify the most cost-effective plot plan/layout (unit) for the proposed
facility/equipment is selected without compromising safety, environment, and
security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and
construction requirements

Check if preliminary engineering design (i.e. Project Proposal/engineering

package to be released to the market) is properly developed by ensuring
stakeholders’ inputs are incorporated (project proposal design reviews closure,
approved Value Engineering recommendations closure, relevant collected
Lessons Learned implementation, etc.)

Verify operations and maintenance requirements are fully considered in the bid
package (i.e. requirements from Pre-Commissioning and Mechanical
Technical

Completion Plan, Operational Readiness Plan, other VIPs)

Check the existence and robustness of pre-commissioning, mechanical

completion, commissioning and hand-over strategies and associated plans

Check if there is a clear identification of roles and responsibilities among

Company, Contractor(s) and 3rd parties/other BIs for Construction, Pre-
commissioning, Commissioning and Startup

Handover:

o Ensure identification of main MCC systems are detailed in pre-commissioning

and mechanical completion plan

o Ensure the commissioning and startup sequencing is outlined and operational

readiness plan is comprehensive

o Check the project team has the proper handover alignment with all
stakeholders including approved shutdown schedule

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 87 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G3 VA Analysis

o Contract alignment with handover requirement

Verify if the Project Execution Plan is adequate (provide enough details around
project construction, pre-commissioning, commissioning and start-up strategies
and sequences), and complete in terms of plans for quality, resource, HSSE,
project control etc., and project specific with all associated contractor
requirements reflected in a Proforma contract

Test if the defined key performance indices for the Execution Phase are
coherent with the project objectives, target and goals
Technical

Verify all the required studies within the HSSE perspective are developed
properly and covering all the compliance requirements

Verify if EIA was submitted and approved by the Saudi Arabian Government
relevant authorities

Verify the planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) are implemented and their
results considered

Check that possible changes to the project commercial characteristics

(commercial, permits, approvals) are considered

Verify Contracting Plan and Procurement Strategy are completed and their
commercial and legal frameworks are adequate
Commercial

Check if the schedule for procuring the EPC contracting is technically and
commercially reasonable

Check if the bidders’ questions and Company’s responses highlight any

significant deficiency in scope definition or/and bidders understanding and
hence expose the Company to potential risks of future cost and/or schedule
impacts and related change orders

Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team

Transv

Verify project is performing within endorsed target and goals

ersal

Verify the Risk Management Plan is updated adequately and the project overall
risk exposure is improved compared to the previous Gate (Check what risks are
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 88 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Typical G3 VA Analysis
still shared/transferred to next stage)

Verify lessons learned from previous projects are collected and implemented

Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team

Check other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA,

regulations, etc.) are well considered

Verify the Stakeholder Management Plan is adequately updated with complete

identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of
influence/interest, clear engagement actions and the evidence of their
continuous and proper involvement
External

Check if there is project plan in place for close monitoring of interfaces and
interdependencies with other related projects

Other external factors assessed by the VA Team

Check project team organization is consistently resourced to support the

following phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities
Organization

Check internal organizations are properly activated for the required activities
and their comments and suggestions are taken into consideration

Assess the IPT internal dynamics (refer to TDI VIP outcome)

Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team

9.2 Value Assurance Process Steps

The VA process consists of five (5) main steps:

• Project VA Plan preparation
• VA Team formation and the VA ToR development
• VA Review execution
• Engagement with the PS
• Pre-Gate Interaction with the Gatekeeper

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 89 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 15 shows a typical schematic for the VA process steps including the VA
resources (manpower, tools, services) allocation and master planning at portfolio
level.

Figure 15: VA Steps

The overall VA process workflow is provided in Attachment V.

The IPT Leader shall engage the VA Leader at the project start and/or the FEL
phase during the development of the overall VA Plan to:

• Map FEL phases, stages, gates, and respective timelines based on decision
interfaces and interdependencies among individual scope packages/BIs.

• Agree upon the development, governance, and execution approach of the

project/program and its constituent scope packages/BIs.

• Identify and agree on any specific project deliverables in addition to what is

defined by the FEL Book of Deliverables as per the RAPID® Matrix.

• Determine and agree upon the number and timeline of the reviews.

9.2.1 Project Value Assurance Plan Preparation

The project VA Plan formalizes the number and schedule of the VA

Reviews and identifies the minimum project deliverables specific to the
upcoming Decision Gate and required to conduct the VA Review. It is
updated at the beginning of each FEL phase and describes the
activities to be performed by both the IPT and VA Team for the
completion and the finalization of the phase in preparation for a

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 90 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Decision Gate.

The VA Review process begins with the IPT Leader developing the
project VA Review Plan to formalize the VA Review(s) timeline before
each gate, ensuring proper submittal of agreed deliverables, and
subsequently, completion of the VA Review by the VA team.

The IPT Leader must initiate the VA plan using EPM. For more details
on EPM, refer to the EPM Manuals.

Input

• Project Charter clearly identifying the planned key decisions

milestones and gate engagement dates for various stages and
Project Planning Brief

• FEL phase Execution Schedule clearly identifying the current FEL

phase activities, their interdependencies, and key decisions with
timeline leading to the upcoming gate

• FEL Book of Deliverables and RAPID® Matrix

• PXP Lenses opportunities mapped against the project

Activity

• CPED assigns the VA Leader and the core VA Team Members

• IPT Leader, based on information in Project Charter, Planning Brief,

Project Milestones Schedule, and FEL phase Execution Schedule,
prepares a draft project VA Plan (or updates the plan from the
previous phase) through EPM including:

• VA Review start and completion dates

• List of applicable project deliverables required for the upcoming VA

Review and the Gate Decision(s).

o IPT Leader shares the draft project VA Plan with the VA Leader
through EPM workflow.

o IPT Leader and VA Leader agree on the applicable versus non-

applicable deliverables. In case of any disagreement on non-
applicable deliverables, IPT Leader shall obtain concurrence

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 91 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

from responsible functional organizations with roles “D” and/or

“A” as per RAPID® Matrix and provide it as part of the draft VA
Plan.

o VA Leader along with the IPT Leader identifies additional

required deliverables (information and documents) specific to
the project including PXP Lenses opportunities earlier identified
for the project at portfolio level.

o VA Leader reviews and approve the project VA Plan through

EPM.

o IPT Leader completes the final project VA Plan through EPM by

no later than six (6) weeks from current project FEL phase
commencement.

Output

• Project VA Plan (see PMOD/CPED reference documents on

PMOD’s website – “VA Plan Template”) is generated automatically
through the EPM system and the responsibilities listed below;

9.2.1.1 Project Value Assurance Resources Allocation and

Master Planning (Internal to CPED)

The objective of this activity is to plan VA Teams

composition requirements in advance, share them with
relevant Saudi Aramco organizations to secure resources
for the relevant VA Team(s), identify constraints in
resources allocation, and define mitigation actions to
address any potential shortfall. This is done for the portfolio
of projects undergoing the CMS through consolidating
resource requirements for the VA Reviews. This master
plan has a rolling 12 months look ahead time horizon.

All required documentation (i.e., project VA Plans, ToRs,

project VA Reports) is controlled centrally in a secured
repository for all completed project VA activities to support
master planning and future reference.

Input

• Project VA Plans for the portfolio of projects

implementing CMS

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 92 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Activity

• CPED consolidates project VA Plans into the VA Master

Plan to identify:

o Need for VA Leaders and required VA Reviews

o Need for resources from different professional

areas and timing

• CPED periodically shares the VA Master Plan with

various functional organizations or their
representatives.

• Functional organizations highlight any constraints in

providing the resources required

• CPED develops mitigation plans based on available

manpower resources

Output

• VA Master Plan including:

o Assignment of required VA Leaders

o Required VA resources from different disciplines

o Actions to ensure availability of VA resources (For

more details, refer to section 9.3)

9.2.2 Value Assurance Team Formation and ToR Development

CPED leverages functional expertise from other Saudi Aramco

organizations to assemble necessary subject matter experts, in the
key areas of project development pertaining to the phase on a
temporary basis, to be part of the VA Team.

CPED may engage external VA consultants, as required, to aid the

VA Team for specific VA Reviews.

Once the required subject matter expertise for the VA review is

identified and the nominations for the VA Team secured from the
Functional Organizations, the VA ToR is finalized and distributed
among the VA Team Members describing the team formation,
activities, timeline, and the focus areas for the upcoming Gate Review.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 93 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

This step is required to be done at least one month before the start of
the VA Review Execution to allow proper preparation time. (For
preliminary list of competencies required for the VA Review at
organizational level, refer to section 9.3.

Input

• Project VA Plan

Activity

• CPED secures internal subject matter expertise from relevant

organizations to form the VA Team.

• In specific cases, CPED secures external subject matter expertise

to support the VA Team on an as required basis.

• The VA Leader prepares and releases the VA ToR to the VA

Team Members, which includes:

o Project background (as explained in Project Charter and

Planning Brief)

o The VA Team members

o The VA Review focus areas and expectations related to the

Gate (see Section 9.1)

o Assignment of review areas/disciplines based on the specialty

of the VA Team Members

o The VA Review Agenda (see PMOD/CPED reference

documents on PMOD’s website – “ToR Template”)

o The VA Review logistics including location and timing for the

VA Review meetings.

o Information when pre-read and/or Desktop Review

documentation will be accessible.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 94 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Output

• VA Team formation and members confirmation

• VA ToR (see PMOD/CPED reference documents on PMOD’s

website – “ToR Template”)

9.2.3 Value Assurance Review Execution

The VA Review execution is performed in two steps; the project

Deliverables Desktop Review by the VA Team through EPM and the
VA Review Meeting(s).

The Desktop Review is initiated by a kick-off meeting with the VA

Team Members as soon as the IPT provides access to the signed off
and completed project deliverables through EPM, as agreed in the
approved project VA Plan.

It is the IPT Leader and PS responsibility to secure signed off and

completed project deliverables endorsed by all stakeholders per
RAPID® Matrix prior to the start of the VA review process.
Note: The signature on the deliverables are acceptable either through a hardcopy
or electronic acknowledgement of the review and concurrence from the responsible
organization in accordance with the RAPID® Matrix. The approval of multiple
deliverables with the same responsible organizations/individuals such as Project
Sponsor and IPT Leader can be obtained through single sign-off.

Kick-Off and Desktop Review typically takes 3-5 days (part time).

During the Desktop Review the VA Team Members examine all key
aspects of a project (Section 9.1) and provide their review outcome
through EPM to the VA Leader prior to the VA Review Meeting(s).

During the VA Review Meeting(s) the VA Team collectively reviews

and analyzes the team findings, interacts with the IPT to seek further
clarifications, as needed, and issues a draft VA Report to the IPT
Leader with specific and actionable recommendations for the IPT
feedback and the response action plan through EPM.

The VA Review Meeting(s) typically takes 3-5 days.

Once the response action plan is provided, the project VA Report is

finalized and issued through EPM. It typically takes 2-5 days (part
time) to finalize the project VA Report.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 95 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Input:

• VA ToR

• Completed project deliverables through EPM VA workflow.

Activity:

Desktop Review

• VA Leader conducts the VA Review kick-off with the VA Team

members. VA Leader may request IPT Leader to present the
objectives, scope, characteristics, and project readiness for the
gate to the VA Team and respond to any VA Team queries.

• The VA Team Members review project deliverables (Desktop

Review) through EPM for their assigned review areas/disciplines
as shared earlier in VA ToR and identify issues, risks,
observations, and preliminary findings with associated
recommendations. The review is based on the following:

o Gaps and opportunities in the deliverables requiring further

investigation/analysis.

o Analysis of implications of decisions made and/or

recommended across different deliverables.

o Each VA Team Member verifies and submits his/her Desktop

Review and the outcome (findings, observations, queries,
issues/risks) to the VA Leader through EPM prior to the VA
Review Meeting.

VA Review Meeting

• VA Team holds VA Review Meeting(s) to consolidate, prioritize,

and collectively analyze the team findings, observations, and
issues/risks.

• VA Team develops the IPT engagement agenda along with the

prioritized list of queries and items to be requested from the IPT
through EPM for further clarification and validation.

• IPT Leader should present the project readiness for the gate to
the VA Team, if not already presented during VA Review Kick-Off
and shall respond to VA Team clarification requests and queries.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 96 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The presentation should cover the project objective, scope, and

characteristics.

• IPT Leader facilitates any further in depth analysis of a particular

aspect of the project with the required IPT Member(s) for further
clarification and validation.

• VA Team finalizes the findings and develops associated

recommendations specific and actionable by the IPT.

• VA Team assesses the impact and urgency of each VA finding on

the project readiness for the gate. See Section 9.2.6 for details.

• VA Team documents findings, observations, and

recommendations.

• VA Leader sends the draft project VA Report to the IPT Leader

through EPM for response and action plan.

• IPT Leader develops, in consultation with the IPT and the PS, the
response and action plan addressing the VA recommendations.

• IPT Leader shares with the VA Leader the response and action
plan through EPM including:

o Action description

o Completion date

• VA Team reviews the response and the action plan offline (further
interaction with the IPT Leader and/or the IPT may be required) to
finalize VA Report.

• Project VA Report is released to the PS and the IPT Leader

through EPM.

It is the IPT Leader and the PS’s responsibility to maintain, track, and
document all open VA findings, including those presented to the
Decision Maker and ensure proper closure, throughout the project
development phases.

Output

VA Action Tracker

9.2.4 Engagement with Project Sponsor

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 97 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Engagement with the PS occurs immediately after the VA Review is

performed but prior to the gate engagement to support the Project
Sponsor’s decision for the next course of action based on the VA
findings, recommendations, and the IPT Response Action plan.

Input

• VA Action Tracker

• Draft IPT Response Action Plan and status.

Activity

• VA Leader engages with the PS to share the VA Review outcome.

• Should the PS decide to bring the project to the gate, the IPT
Leader in coordination with the VA Leader prepares the draft
project Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package) consisting of:

o Project gate presentation including VA Review outcome.

o Project gate pre-read/brief and VA Executive Summary.

• Should the PS find the project not ready for progressing to the
next phase and for the gate engagement, the IPT Leader in
coordination with the VA Leader revises the VA Plan accordingly.

Output

• Finalized IPT Response Action Plan and status endorsed by the

PS.

• Draft project gate submittal (Decision Support Package, including

gate presentation, pre-read/brief, and VA Executive Summary).

9.2.5 Pre-Gate Interaction with Gatekeeper

After the PS request to schedule the gate engagement, the

Gatekeeper ensures the following in the Gate Submittal (Decision
Support Package) (refer to MC/BLC “Gate Engagement Guideline” for
details):

o Project pre-read document and presentation are aligned with the

set criteria for the gate.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 98 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o Project VA Review was conducted and its outcome is included in

the VA Executive Summary in the Gate Submittal and
presentation (Decision Support Package).

The Gatekeeper may request additional clarification from the PS

and/or the VA Leader to prepare for the gate. The information
submitted should be sufficient, current and relevant to the ggate
objective in order to assist the Decision Maker in determining project
readiness and to finalize the current phase prior to proceeding to the
next one.

9.2.6 Prioritization of VA Recommendations

The VA Team recommendations represent the core content of the VA

Review. At the end of the VA review activities, the VA Team should
evaluate the recommendations in terms of two variables:

• Impact – The potential impact of issues/risks on overall project

value.

• Urgency – How rapidly the recommendation needs to be resolved.

Both variables must be evaluated on a three-point scale. Table 8

below presents possible values of those variables.

IMPACT

Potential to significantly impact achieving project objectives and/or

High (H) major impact on project value (if can be directly linked to economic
values, > 20% of project NPV)

Potential for significant value erosion through schedule, costs, reserves

Medium (M) or revenue, with significant impact on project value (between 5% and
20% of project NPV)

Low (L) Potential for value erosion, but limited (<5% of project NPV)

URGENCY

High (H) To be closed before the Gate or in the early phase of the next Stage

Medium (M) To be closed during next phase before the next VA Review, if applicable

To be closed during project execution phase and status update provided

Low (L)
part of project assurance reports

Table 8
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 99 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The list of VA recommendations identified are divided according to

the area of interest and rated in terms of the urgency and impact.
Note: Not all recommendations raised by the VA Team can be directly translated
into economic values. Therefore, the NPV is intended just as a proxy when
applicable.

9.3 Project Value Assurance Resources Allocation and Master Planning

VA Teams are composed of a mix of:

• VA Leaders that are dedicated VA experts appointed by CPED.

• Core team composed of experts from CPED assigned as required.

• Temporarily assigned experts (Specialist level) from functional organizations

who have not been involved in the project development.

The VA Leader is responsible to define and tailor the VA Team composition

based upon the specific FEL phase at which the review is to be performed, and
upon the following characteristics:

• Project class (A, B, C or C1-Type).

• Specific project aspects already identified as main objective of the review.

• Typology/technology involved in the project.

As a guideline, the VA Team should be staffed in a manner so every relevant

project area of expertise involved in the FEL stage is directly covered by a
dedicated expert.

The size of the VA Team is directly correlated with the number of areas of
expertise required to effectively perform the VA Review.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 100 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 16 provides a guideline for setting up the VA Team through the different
FEL Stages as determined by the VA leader.

Figure 16: VA Review Team Composition in different FEL Stages

10 Target Setting

This section describes creating and sustaining an effective Target Setting

process as a CMS Efficiency Enabler in achieving its leadership in capital
projects planning, development, execution and delivery. Additionally, it provides
an overview of the functional organizations roles and responsibilities.

10.1 Definition and Objectives of Target Setting

Facilities Planning Department is the process owner and provides overall TS

governance, while the Project Management Office Department manages the
preparation of TS process data repositories required.

For definitions refer to Section. 6.4.

10.2 Target Setting Process Overview

The Target Setting process steps are repetitive for each phase; however, the
process focus evolves with the project development maturity throughout the
FEL process.

10.2.1 Type A and B Projects

Driver Selection

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 101 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

At the FEL 2 Study Phase, the IPT Leader will seek approval from the
Project Sponsor on the primary project driver (Target) which is cost.
In cases where schedule is the primary driver, justification is required.

Setting Target and Goals

The first Target Setting meeting, in accordance with Figure 17 below,

shall be held at the start of FEL2 DBSP and the second Target
Setting meeting shall be held at the start of FEL3 Project Proposal
following the end of the Gate Variance Validation Process, (refer to
Attachment VI). The meeting shall be conducted no later than 30%
development of the applicable phase. The meeting outcome is
documented in the Target Settings Deliverable and subject to Value
Assurance Review.

Target Evaluation at the Gate

Prior to the FEL2 DBSP or FEL3 PP Deliverables submission to the

Value Assurance Review, the IPT Leader with the support of the
relevant IPT members will evaluate the set targets at the beginning
and documented by the Target Settings Deliverable. The
documentation will include an explanation of any variance to the
previously agreed targets. The evaluation reports at the end of each
FEL stage will be made available to PMOD.

10.2.2 Type C and C1 Projects Overview

The Target Setting process for Type C projects shall be conducted at

the start of FEL2 DBSP phase, while C1 projects begin at 60% of the
DBSP Phase. See Figure 9.

Exception: If FEL2 DBSP is combined with FEL3 PP, Target Setting

process for C & C1 projects will apply for FEL3.

Driver Selection

At the FEL 2 Study Phase, the IPT Leader will seek approval from the
Project Sponsor on the primary project driver (Target) which is cost.
In cases where schedule is the primary driver, justification is required.

Setting Target and Goals

The Target Setting meeting shall be held at the start of the FEL2
DBSP. The meeting shall be conducted no later than 30%
development of the applicable phase for C type projects and no later
than 60% for C1 type projects. The meeting outcome is documented
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 102 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

in the Target Settings Deliverable and subject to Value Assurance

Review.

Target Evaluation at the Gate

Prior the FEL2 DBSP or FEL3 PP Deliverables submission into the

Value Assurance Review, the IPT Leader with the support of the
relevant IPT Members will evaluate the set targets at the beginning
and documented by the Target Settings Deliverable. The
documentation will include an explanation of any variance to the
previously agreed targets. The evaluation reports at the end of each
FEL.

PMOD
st nd
1 Target Evaluation 2 Target Evaluation

Business Project Finalize G3

Initiation G1 Study GAS DBSP G2
Case Proposal FEL

Primary Driver Selection TS Meeting

Figure 17: Target Setting

Selection of Primary Project Drivers

By default, cost is the primary project driver and schedule is

secondary, unless justified by IPT and approved by the Project
Sponsor to be reversed. Primary project driver shall be the project
target and can be either a defined number or a narrower range
compared to non-primary driver, and the other drivers are project
goals and will have a range. For example:

• For a cost-driven project, cost is the primary metric:

o CapEx target: 2 B$

o Schedule goal: Completion in 36-38 months

• For a schedule-driven project, schedule is the primary metric:

o Schedule target: Completion in 36 months

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 103 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o CapEx goal: between 2 and 2.3 B$

Targets are often in a trade-off (e.g., a reduction in schedule might

imply an increase in cost, a cost reduction might be achieved at the
expense of schedule); therefore, trade-offs shall be considered and
carefully evaluated when making decisions on targets.

10.3 Target Setting Process Steps

10.3.1 Primary Driver Selection

The IPT Leader shall utilize the Business Plan to identify the project
target and shall seek approval from the PS on the primary driver
(Target) between cost and schedule for the project.

10.3.2 Target Setting Meeting

Target Setting Meeting is implemented as an iterative process with

three steps performed in each project phase as applicable:

10.3.3 Target Setting Benchmark Preparation

10.3.3.1 Type A & B Projects to be Provided by PMOD

Input:

• Project Charter (at Business Case) or Decision Maker

direction on targets from previous gates

• Project Charter and scope breakdown

• Similar BIs, briefs, BISIs and scope breakdown from

previous projects

Activity

• Project Leader, along with PMOD, breaks down the

project into types and sub-types using the standard
classification defined by PMOD or further details the
breakdown developed in previous phases.

• Project Leader, along with PMOD, selects the

fundamental Project Metrics or further refines the
analysis done in previous phases.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 104 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• PMOD provides benchmarking metrics (internal and/or

external as required, where available).

Output

• Work breakdown structure of the project with types

and subtypes to be used for Target Setting.

Exception

Benchmarking data might not be available for some

projects because no similar projects were executed in the
past within Saudi Aramco or there is no external
benchmarking available.

10.3.3.2 Type C & C1 Projects to be Provided by IPT Leader

Input:

• Current cost estimate

• Current IPT schedule

• Identified risk information

• Any study results available

Activity

• For cost, IPT Leader will set initial target CapEx value
(single figure) compared to current estimate based on
below suggested range. IPT Leader will provide
reasoning (basis and assumptions) for his initial
suggestion.

o C project: 95 -100% of estimate value

o C-1 project: 90-95% of estimate value

• For schedule, IPT Leader will set initial execution

duration range compared to current IPT schedule
based on below suggested range. IPT Leader will
provide reasoning (basis and assumptions) for his
initial suggestion.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 105 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

o C project: 95 -100% of ERA-ERC (or OS) duration

as month

o C-1 project 90-100% of ERA-ERC (or OS) duration

as month

Output

Suggested target of CapEx and goal of execution

duration.

10.3.4 Target Setting Meeting Lead by the IPT Leader

The objective of this step is to set and/or update the

project target and goals and define an action plan to
achieve them. This step encompasses a meeting at the
beginning of the phase, supported by the latest
estimates, design, and benchmarking findings where
available and/or applicable. Relevant activities include;

Input:

• List of fundamental project metrics and initial values

• Latest available cost and schedule estimates

• Benchmarking metrics data from PMOD

Activity:

IPT Leader will call for the meeting and invite PMOD and
other relevant stakeholders. The following items are
discussed:

• Differences between latest estimates for fundamental

project metrics and initial input, or Decision Maker
direction on targets at previous gate

• Differences between latest estimates for fundamental

project metrics and historical performance (from
internal benchmarking where available) and industry
performance (if external benchmarking is available)

• Targets to be set on fundamental project metrics

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 106 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Standard KPIs and target values (these KPIs are

presented and target values are discussed only in
case of deviation from standard values)

• Project enablers

• Action plan on how to achieve the targets, project

performance to date compared to FEL benchmarks.

Output:

Target Setting Deliverable – Issued by the IPT Leader

and approved by PS, which includes:

• Targets set for the fundamental project metrics or

updates of previous targets (FEL3 PP)

• Standard KPIs to be tracked, target values and actual

values

• Enablers with actual values

• Action plan to meet target values which shall include:

o Technical specifications

o Opportunities identified from PXP

o Procurement and contracting strategies

o Further investigation of the differences between

current project estimates and benchmarking data

o Leveraging Lessons Learned from

specific projects.

For more details, refer to Attachment XI - Target Setting

Deliverable.

10.4 Target Evaluation

Prior to the FEL2 DBSP or FEL3 PP deliverables presentation into the Value
Assurance Review (with the support of the relevant IPT Members) the IPT
Leader will evaluate gate achievement (gate cost estimate and execution
duration for schedule) by comparing with the set targets at the beginning and

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 107 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

recording it to the gate presentation. (refer to Attachment VI for exemplary

template).

The slide will include an explanation of any variance to the previously agreed
targets if variance is more than 15% from IPT agreement or reference
parameter. The evaluation reports at the end of each FEL stage will be made
available to PMOD.

10.5 Roles and Responsibilities

The roles and responsibilities of team members are summarized below in Figure
18:

Figure 18: Team Member Roles and Responsibilities

10.6 Target Setting Metrics

Fundamental project cost and schedule metrics allow the project’s performance
to be measured, maximizing value and continuously stretching performance.

10.6.1 Cost

Examples of Cost Metrics:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 108 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Capital Expenditure: Simple way of tracking the amount of capital

spent on projects. It can be applied on an overall project level or a
sub-project level.

Cost Capacity Metrics (where available): More articulated method of

tracking costs on projects. It is calculated in coherence with the split
of projects into types and sub-types. Examples of cost capacity
metrics and their corresponding project sub-types:

• Lang Factor and PMOD internal metrics

• $ per Barrel Oil Equivalent for a GOSP

• $ per MMscf for a gas processing facility

• $ per tons/day for a sulfur recovery unit

• $ per MMscf for an NGL recovery unit

• $ per m³ for sulfur storage

• $ per In-Km for subsea pipelines

• $ per In-Km for onshore pipelines

• $ per sq. m for residential buildings

• $ per MVA for electrical substations

• $ per MVA and steam for cogeneration plants

• $ per In-km for electrical transmission/distribution systems

• $ per tons of carbon reduction for carbon emission reduction

projects

The IPT needs to define the breakdown of the project into types and
sub-types and decide on the cost capacity metrics relevant to each
project sub-type. An example of project breakdown with cost capacity
metrics is provided in Figure 19 below.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 109 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 19: Project Breakdown with Cost Capacity Metrics Example

10.6.2 Schedule

Examples of schedule metrics:

Duration

• Number of months from start of FEL1 to ERA

• Number of months from ERA to ERC

11 Accelerated CMS

Accelerated CMS defines the process for initiation, approval, and subsequent
development and delivery of distinct capital projects designated as
“Accelerated”. It provides details on recommended acceleration enablers and
their integration into the project development and delivery process augmenting
the Company’s’ CMS. Accelerated enablers include the project organizational
structure, key roles and decision-making authority, as well as other planning
and execution requirements, relative to the Company’s standard project delivery
practices.

The objective of accelerated projects is to enable the development and delivery

of specific Saudi Aramco capital projects significantly faster than Company and
industry norms to meet key business objectives as approved by Company
Senior Management.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 110 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

11.1 Process Overview

The acceleration process overview is illustrated in Figure 20:

Figure 20: Accelerated Capital Project Process Overview

11.2 Initiation and Approval

11.2.1 Initiation

The submittal for the project shall, at minimum, meet the

requirements of SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines and shall
follow the current CMS process. After completing FEL1/Business
Case phase requirements and subsequent inclusion of the project
into the Capital Program, the Proponent organization shall appoint
the PS and the functional organizations shall assign the IPT SMEs.

11.2.2 Nomination and FEL2/Study Phase Development

Upon nomination for acceleration by the Proponent organization, the

IPT shall evaluate “Acceleration” as one of the development
alternatives as part of the FEL2/Study phase to compare with the
other alternatives of project development. Project’s nominated for
acceleration shall complete the minimum list of FEL2/Study phase
deliverables shown in Table 10, ensuring engagement with the
stakeholders as per the RAPID® Matrix prior to evaluation for
acceleration.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 111 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Minimum List of FEL Deliverables

Study Brief Land Use Permit

Business Case Assessment Flare and Relief Study, if

applicable

Abbreviated Project Execution Plan Flow Assurance Study, if

applicable

Stakeholder Management Plan Level I Schedule

Site Selection Assessment Study Cost Estimate

Process Design

Table 10: Minimum List of FEL Deliverables

Note: Nomination for acceleration approval does not relieve the project of meeting
existing CMS requirements.

11.2.3 Evaluation

Once all minimum required deliverables are developed, the

proponent shall submit the official request for acceleration to FPD,
Finance, and SMA. Submittal for acceleration shall be provided at
least one (1) month prior to the scheduled evaluation and shall
include, as minimum, aforementioned deliverables articulating
expected benefits of proposed acceleration as well as the primary
associated risks and proposed mitigations.

The Corporate Centers (FPD, SMA, and Finance) will evaluate the
nominated project to verify the need for acceleration considering the
criteria as shown below in Table 11.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 112 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Economical projects with high NPV

Strategic Fit Government directive

Safety, security, and environmental compliance

Greenfield/brownfield Proponent familiarity and

Complexity
experience

Design basis readiness, (i.e., optimum alternative

selected, business requirement) feedstock availability
Proponent & readiness
Readiness
Site selection and Land Use Permits (LUPs)
requirements

Table 11: Accelerated Project Evaluation Criteria

11.2.4 Approval by Management Committee

Based on the outcome of the acceleration alternative evaluation, the

PS shall present the project nominated for acceleration to the MC at
Acceleration Gate (AG) shown in Figure 21 to obtain approval to
invoke this acceleration procedure. The MC presentation shall
contain the following items:

• Business objective and justification

• Scope

• Estimate and schedule

• Primary risks and mitigating factors

• Expected benefits

• Evaluation criteria results

11.2.5 Development and Delivery Stage and Gate Process

Accelerated projects shall implement an adapted stage and gate

process as shown in Figure 21.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 113 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 21: Accelerated Project Phase and Gate Process

11.2.6 Pre-FEED Gate (PFG)

At the completion of Pre-FEED Phase, a VA Review shall be required

to independently validate project scope freeze. PFG is a soft gate that
does not require a formal gate engagement with the MC. However,
an engagement with the Executive Vice President of Technical
Services shall be required to secure project endorsement to proceed
past PFG. While securing this endorsement, the IPT shall continue
with critical and priority scope development work, as necessary, to
support a seamless transition into the FEED Phase.

The following key deliverables are mandated for Pre-FEED phase

completion:

• Approved DBSP, scope frozen in accordance with earlier AG MC

approval

• Budget quality estimate as per SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation

Guidelines

• Level II schedule as per SAEP-331 Project Schedule

Requirements

• List of long lead items requiring early funding (PAER) or novation

before ERA

• Pre-FEED Phase VA Review Outcome (Findings and

Recommendations)
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 114 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• The VA Team shall share the VA outcome with the Project

Sponsor and the IPT for the timely implementation of VA
recommendations.

In the event of any unresolved conflict or disagreements between

Technical Services and Project Sponsor, further escalation to MC
shall be required.

11.2.7 Gate 3

As per the CMS process, the PS shall engage MC at Gate 3 for

authorization of funding and execution. A VA Review shall be
conducted in support of Gate 3 in accordance with the established
procedure under CMS process.

11.3 Additional Reviews and Workshops

The IPT shall conduct independent formal reviews (e-Reviews) at 60% and
90% FEED phase design utilizing the Company-established e-Review system
(refer to SAEP-303 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation). The
review cycle for functional organizations to complete the e-Review should not
exceed a period of two (2) weeks.

The IPT shall conduct a risk management workshop with the functional
organizations early in the Pre-FEED Phase.

The IPT shall develop and agree on handover criteria among all key
stakeholders. Handover between the various stakeholders during the project
lifecycle shall be established at the start of the project.

11.4 Deliverables

Pre-FEED and FEED phase deliverables shall be in accordance with Table 12

and deliverables roles and responsibilities as per the RAPID® Matrix in section
14.

Pre - FEED FEED

Proposed Integrated Staffing

Project Proposal Review Reports
Assignment (FEL2B)

Project Charter (Final) (Pre-Feed) Project Proposal Package

Process Design (update) (Pre-Feed) Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Study

Business Case Assessment (Final) Flare and Relief Study - (System

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 115 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Pre - FEED FEED

(Pre-FEED) Report - final)

Project Execution Plan (Final) (Pre-

Project Quality Plan
FEED)

Reliability, Availability and

VIP - Applicable VIPs Report
Maintainability (RAM)

VIP Outcome Implementation Report Pre-Commissioning & Mechanical

(Pre-FEED) Completion

Schedule Level II (Pre-FEED) Schedule Level III

Budget Estimate (±30%) (Pre-FEED) Contracting Strategy (Final)

Stakeholder Management Plan (Pre-

Contracts Procurement
FEED)

Land Use Permit (Pre-FEED) Project Interface Plan (Final)

Flare and Relief Study (Pre-FEED) Stakeholder Management Plan

Technology Selection Report (update)

Project Execution Plan - Full (Final)
(Pre-FEED)

Procurement strategy & material

Flow Assurance (updated) (Pre-FEED)
procurement

Energy Optimization & Green Energy Operational Readiness Plan (ORP)

Report (Final) (Pre-FEED) Level II

Utility Power Supply Plan (Final) (Pre-

VIP Outcome Implementation Report
FEED)

Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)

Target Setting
(FEL2 B)

Environmental Impact Assessment

ER Estimate (±10%)
(Pre-FEED)

Proposed Integrated Staffing

Target Setting (FEL2 B)
Assignment

Finalize FEL (ER) Brief and

Plot Plans (Pre-FEED)
Presentation

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 116 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Pre - FEED FEED

Design for Maintainability Report Project Closeout Report

Building Risk Assessment (Final) Development of hand-over criteria

Facilities Security Assessment (Final) Gate Outcome Report

IT/ICS Security Architecture

Electrical System Design & Analysis
Assessment (Final) (Pre-FEED)

Procurement strategy & material

procurement (FEL2 B)

Site Selection Assessment (Pre-Feed)

Electrical System Design & Analysis

Table 12: Deliverables for Accelerated Projects

11.4.1 Procurement

11.4.1.1 Services

I. Services Review Committee Review and Approval

a. Contracting Strategy

The project Contracting Strategy when submitted

to SRC for approval, shall include, as deemed
necessary, plan and bid slates for all packages or
selected packages and waiver from normal SRC
requirement. This could include, but not be limited
to: raising SRC approval authority for competitive
bids, sole source, change order limits, and
authorizing inclusion of incentive plans. This shall
be applicable to services and materials.

b. SRC Chairman Approval

In exceptional circumstances, SRC approval is

required to be obtained from the President or SRC
Chairman. Such items shall be subject to SRC
reviews as information items. For details, refer to
“SA Procurement Manual”.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 117 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

II. Engineering Agreements for Pre-FEED and FEED

Accelerated projects should, as applicable, utilize

approved agreements established with Project
Management Contractors to optimize procurement
lead-time. Out-of-Kingdom contracting party shall be
ASC, AOC, or AAC, as appropriate. Refer to the
Contracting Department for the list of approved PMC
agreements.

III. Accelerated Projects EPC Bid Slates

Accelerated projects are recommended to utilize the

Accelerated Projects EPC Bid Slate containing the
identified list of qualified contractors or an alternative
selective bid slate, as required.

IV. EPC Contractor during FEED

As applicable and subject to SRC approval, EPC

contractors may be engaged during the FEED
development using the following methods:

a. Letter of Intent

b. Engage EPC contractor during the FEED

c. Converted Lump Sum Turnkey contracting strategy

V. Letter of Intent

A Letter of Intent is utilized to enable early

mobilization, long lead items procurement, etc., upon
SRC approval. The Letter of Intent should adhere to
the Procurement Manual’s requirements and
restrictions and be supported with a risk based
analysis for use.

VI. Pro-forma Contract to Reduce Contractor Risk

The accelerated project pro-forma contract shall be

utilized as applicable. A copy of the pro-forma contract
is available on the Electronic Contracting Network.(For
further details refer to the Contracting Department
homepage)

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 118 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

VII. Performance/Capacity-based Selection

Accelerated project contract awards shall be based on

performance and capacity. The detailed criteria for
award shall be explicitly stated in the SRC Plan paper.

VIII. Sub-contracting

The project shall ensure subcontractor selection under

the main contracts complies with the accelerated
projects prequalified sub-contractors list, otherwise, a
prequalification process shall be executed on a case-
by-case basis. Refer to the Contracting Department
for the approved list.

11.4.1.2 Material

I. Services Review Committee Review and Approval

In exceptional circumstances, SRC approval is

required to be obtained from President or SRC
Chairman. Such items shall be subject to SRC
reviews as information items.

II. Early Procurement

Accelerated projects are recommended to develop

and implement, as applicable, project specific early
procurement plans, supported with the necessary
PAER funding. The procurement plans should be part
of the Contracting Strategy submitted for SRC
approval or in a separate submittal to SRC. The plan
should include the identified procurement mechanisms
and associated acceleration requirements such as, In-
Kingdom Total Value Add, vendor selection,
premiums, terms and conditions, etc.

Early procurement includes the requirement to

procure critical long-lead equipment and materials to
meet the accelerated project objectives, as confirmed
in project execution planning. Thereby, material and
equipment on the critical path should be identified
early in project planning process.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 119 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The project should ensure all other key early

procurement conditions are met including availability
of approved sources, and/or one-time supplier
approvals, clearly defined scope of supply, and
applicable change order rates. Based on the scope of
supply and project execution requirements, the
following types of material procurement mechanisms
may be utilized:

• Stand-alone Purchase Order: Single buying

transaction

• Procurement Agreement: Long term buying

relationship for a specific user or project

• Corporate Procurement Agreement: Long term

buying relationship to leverage total company
spend (equipment, services, spare parts)

III. Novated Procurement

Novated purchase orders should be issued, as

applicable, specifying the commitment to the following
procurement phases:

• Engineering

• Fabrication

The project shall ensure the LSTK contractor’s

unconditional acceptance to the novated PO, including
signature of the novation agreement documents within
the contract specified timeframe.

The approval of the novated PO shall follow the SRC

Authority Matrix unless waived by the SRC.

IV. Regulated Vendor List Approval and Limit Sub-

components Application

The contractor may recommend a non-RVL vendor for

Company consideration. However, the contractor shall
submit a quality/technical pre-qualification assessment
package to the Company for evaluation. Refer to
Attachment VII for the quality screening checklist and

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 120 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment VIII for the technical screening checklist

and package contents.

Within fourteen (14) days of receiving the above

referenced submittal, the Engineering Services
Vendor Review Committee shall approve or reject the
submittal following the creation of Enterprise
Resource Planning workflow by P&SCM.

V. Company Inspection Involvement in Procurement

Company level of inspection involvement will follow

below Table 13.
Contractor Inspector

Purchase Order Focus Assessment

Senior Inspector

Technical
Inspection PMT Proponent
SME
Monitoring
Risk Level

Company

30%

60%

90%

30%

60%

90%

60%

90%

60%

90%
Critical ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

High ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Medium ✓ ✓

Low ✓

Table 13: Company Level of Inspection

Contractor shall develop the procurement risk analysis

in accordance with 8.5-QAP-04-ID for the project
material list and submit the analysis for IPT review
and approval.

VI. Expediting Contracts in Out-of-Kingdom Offices

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 121 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Accelerated projects should utilize the existing

expediting agreements at Aramco Services Company,
Aramco Overseas Company, and Aramco Asia where:

• The IPT should issue notification, as needed, to

the designated OOK office to invoke an expediting
request.

• All released work orders shall be charged against

the project Work Breakdown Structure and cost
center, as per specific agreement pricing sheet.

11.4.1.3 Incentives and Liquidated Damages Clauses

Applicability of incentive plans shall be assessed on a

case-by-case basis according to the project requirements
and shall be detailed in the SRC Plan. Incentive plan
conditions to be considered include:

• Scope of purchase order or service contract falls in

the critical path of the work/project.

• Reasonable lead-time allocated when awarding

purchase order or service contract to suppliers to
avoid disputed extension of time claim.

• Incentive plan should be functionally reviewed by Law

and Finance organizations.

11.4.2 Construction

11.4.2.1 Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan (SATIP)

Construction Activities

Company level of inspection involvement will follow

below Table 14:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 122 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Kickoff
Focus
Contractor Company Sr. Meeting/
Risk Level Assess
Involvement Involvement Inspector Method
ment
Statement

Critical Hold Hold Yes Yes Yes

Repeated Hold Yes No Yes

High Hold
Normal Witness Yes No Yes

Repeated Hold Witness Yes No Yes

Medium
Normal Witness Surveillance No No No

Low Witness Surveillance No No No

Table 14: Company Level of Involvement in Inspection

Contractor shall develop the construction risk analysis in

accordance with 8.5-QAP-04-ID for all SATIP/SAIC
inspection activities and submit the analysis for the IPT
review and approval.

11.4.2.2 Third-party Certifications

Third-party certification for heavy equipment shall be

permitted for use as follows:

a. Pre-Approval of Recognized Certification Bodies

Contractors shall be required to provide the names of

their origin country’s certifications bodies as part of the
bid package.

The IPT shall appoint a team to review the bodies for

approval. Eventually, this will build an approved list of
accredited certification bodies.

b. Exclusions

Only SA certified operators and riggers are permitted

to perform activities in operating facilities. Work
activities in operating facilities are not eligible for a
waiver.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 123 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

c. Risk Mitigation

Projects are recommended to create a new project

position for Heavy Equipment Superintendent. This
position will be responsible for the implementation and
adherence to the Accelerated Project Heavy
Equipment Certification Process previously performed
exclusively by Transportation & Equipment Services
Department.

12 CMS for Digital Projects

This Section defines the CMS development process for digital projects and the
minimum project requirements across the project lifecycle.

12.1 Scope

The objective is to enable the development and delivery of Saudi Aramco’s

Digital Transformation projects and provide the necessary agility and fit for
purpose in software related projects. The digital project planning and execution
process is an adaptive methodology guiding the project success where
requirements are validated, designed, configured, and tested throughout all
phases.

12.2 Applicability and Timing

This section is only applicable to projects characterized as digital by the DT

Admin Area and that meet one of the following requirements:

• Included in the approved 3-Year Capital Program.

• Included in the DT Master Plan or endorsed by DT Admin Area.

For Digital Projects introduced outside the business planning cycle, the
applicability of the requirements listed within this procedure will be assessed on
a case by case basis.
Note: This procedure can be considered for software projects that are not characterized as
"Digital" if agreement is established between FPD, CA, and PMOD/CPED.

12.3 Digital Project Process Overview

Digital projects will continue to use the general CMS framework process and its
efficiency enablers

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 124 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

However, due to their unique nature, digital projects scoping and design will
constitute merging DBSP elements and Project Proposal phase activities into
one phase called the FEED Phase. Moreover, certain tasks from the Study,
DBSP and Project Proposal are advanced to the Initiation/Study/30% FEED
Phase. Facilities Planning Department leads the Initiation/Study Phases up to
30% FEED and the CA will assume the leadership to complete FEED
development through Execution post FPD, CA and PS approval of the 30%
FEED Package. The subsequent sections detail the requirements needed to
meet the objective of each phase and the process is depicted in Figure 22.

Figure 22: Digital Project Lifecycle Overview

12.4 Governance and Reporting

Digital projects governance:

• FPD will validate business case prior to introducing the item into Capital
Program.

• All deliverables must be completed to move from Initiation/Study to FEED

phase.

• The scope is frozen after approving the 30% FEED package by FPD
Manager, Project Sponsor, and Construction Agency as per the RAPID®
Matrix in Appendix X.

• Scope Change from approved DBSP Request (SCDR) shall be processed

for any scope changes after FPD approval of 30% FEED package.

• PMOD/CPED will conduct a VA Review prior to the bid package release to

the market and the VA report is to be issued to the Project Sponsor with a
copy to DT.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 125 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• The DT Admin Area Head or delegate will act as a soft gate before the
design package release to the market. The IPT shall share the design
package and Value Assurance review report with DT for review and
endorsement to proceed before releasing the design package to market.
The endorsement may be in any written form as in letter, email, MoM etc.

• BLC/BLH review and endorsement for ER funding at FEL Gate 3.

The IPT shall issue a monthly project status update report to PS with copy to
DT using documentation shown in Attachment X. The EPM system can also be
used to report progress on the project.

12.5 Development and Delivery

12.5.1 Initiation/ Study/ 30% FEED

Facilities Planning Department leads the Initiation/Study Phases up to

30% FEED and the CA assumes the leadership to complete FEED
development through Execution after FPD, CA and PS approval of
the 30% FEED Package. All projects following this section shall meet
the requirements stipulated in SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
and shall follow the CMS process as described herein.

The Project Scoping Document (PSD), Study Cost Estimate,

Schedule Level I, and Stakeholder Management Plan must be
completed timely. The PSD should not be considered a scope freeze
document, rather a high-level technical scope document to be used
by the IPT and solution integrator to develop the project design.

FPD shall initiate a request for the PS assignment, form the IPT, and
select the CA for the Design and Execution phases during the
Initiation Stage.

IPT Members will support FPD lead planner to complete the following
Initiation and Study phase requirements:

• Business Case Validation by FPD

• Project Scoping Document

• Project Schedule (Level I)

• Cost Estimate in accordance with SAEP-25

• Stakeholder Management Plan

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 126 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Contracting Strategy and procurement for Design Phase (e.g.

solution integrator) – To be developed during the 30% FEED.

• IT/ICS Security Architecture Assessment deliverable to identify

information security risks and vulnerabilities that could
compromise Saudi Aramco IT infrastructure, for either
internal/external Saudi Aramco users or external for non-Saudi
Aramco users. To be developed during the 30% FEED.

• Technology Selection Report deliverable in which it shall describe

the major software components and associated licenses
requirements and also specify the number of users of the system–
To be developed during the 30% FEED.

• 30% FEED package

TC-68 request preparation, as stipulated in GI-202.451, and the

preparation and distribution of Form SA-6891 shall be carried out by
the CA.

12.5.2 FEED Phase

The CA leads the remaining design phase activities while the IPT
Leader from the Initiation Phase will continue to be part of the IPT
team.

The project design document is a document with sufficient

engineering details so it can be used as the basis for bidding the
Execution Phase contracts and is used as the design basis.

The following requirements are to be completed during this phase;

Final FEED Package

The purpose of the package is to define the technical requirements,

features, and configuration of the system from the stakeholder’s point
of view. This will help to minimize design changes as the project
evolves and mitigate cost and risk associated with significant late
changes. The process owner/proponent organization must accept this
document.

The SCDR form must be approved by FPD management, and

concurred by the PS and CA’s management prior to any commitment
to the scope change. See SAEP-14 for more information and forms
for the SCDR process.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 127 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Digital Project Execution Plan

The PEP supports the effective and efficient planning for the key
project development and delivery requirements. Updates to
previously developed project deliverables can be added as
appendices to the PEP to meet the requirements. The PEP
deliverable shall include the following:

• Project Summary

• Updated Contracting Strategy

• Materials Procurement Strategy

• Updated Stakeholder Management Plan

• Project Organization and Interfaces

• Target Setting

• IT/ICS Security Architecture Assessment (update) - To address IT

and Industrial Control Systems security risks and determine the
necessary security measures to be implemented.

VIP Outcome Implementation Report

Agree on and implement applicable VIPs as per SAEP-367 – Value

Improving Practices.

Technology Selection Report (update)

It is best to develop this deliverable at the beginning of the phase to

ensure timely selection of the best technology which meets the
project objective most economically and minimizing rework toward
the end of the phase. This should be done by the 30% FEED
completion when the scope is fixed.

Operational Readiness Plan

The ORP establishes clear roles and responsibilities between

proponent and service providers to ensure end user readiness for a
smooth handover (e.g. system downtime/training requirements). The
completion and approval of the Operational Readiness Plan shall
address the following;

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 128 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• Handover Plan describing the key items the CA shall address as

part of the application/system hand over process to the proponent
to ensure a smooth phase-in/phase-out approach and avoid
negative business impact. This also includes assessing phased
approach versus big bang.

• Training and Change Management shall explain the training and

change management to be planned as part of the project.

System Architecture

Ensure the proposed solution is aligned with the Company’s direction

and guidelines for digitalization.

• Company approved ER Cost Estimate as per SAEP-25

• Business Case Validation by FPD

• Project Schedule (Level III)

• Finalize FEL (ER) Brief and Presentation

The key deliverables to be developed for this phase are shown in the
RAPID® Matrix in Attachment IX.

12.5.3 Value Assurance Review

A Value Assurance Review shall be conducted by PMOD\CPED

before the release of the bid package to the market. A Value
Assurance Report is to be issued to the Project Sponsor with a copy
to DT. Within one month of the Design Phase start, the IPT Leader
shall agree with the Value Assurance Leader on the best timing for
the VAR prior to bid package release. The review is to be performed
by an independent multidisciplinary team, examining all aspects of
the project from diverse, holistic and cross discipline perspective to
ensure the project is meeting the business objective. The VAR shall
also identify any opportunities and/or risks for the successful project
execution.

12.5.4 Gate Engagement

At the end of the Design Phase, the PS will engage with the Decision
Maker to obtain endorsement and release of ER funds and to
progress into the Execution Phase. At Gate 3, the PS shall present
the project readiness for progressing into the following phase with

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 129 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Value Assurance recommendations to the Decision Maker (BLC/BLH)

to support an informed decision. The project must comply with
existing Business Line Committee Gate engagement guidelines (refer
to the Management Guide). A whitepaper can be used in lieu of
formal engagement with Decision Maker (BLC/BLH) should the
Decision Maker (BLC/BLH) approve this approach.

12.5.5 Execution Phase

The CA is responsible for the Execution Phase which involves

Detailed Design and implementation and which could include user
acceptance testing. The following requirements are to be completed
during this phase;

• Develop equipment/material details for constructing the scope

• Ensure timely procurement of material/equipment/services and

that logistical requirements are addressed

• System Design Document which includes further design details for

configuration and features required

• User Acceptance Tests and documentation of any customization

• Commissioning and deployment plan

• Project/User Handover: The handover timing can vary depending

on the project scope and can come at the end of the Deployment
phase

12.5.6 Deployment Phase

• Deployed solution meets users’ requirements

• Deployed system with high quality and without any critical defects

• Finalize the project

13 CMS for Project Replication & Execution Outsourcing

13.1 Scope

This section defines the framework for project replication (Thrift Design) and
execution outsourcing (Project Proxy Execution – P2E). It sets the minimum
requirements for the delivery of capital projects nominated in the Business Plan

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 130 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

as a result of Execution Path Assessment to follow either of these execution

paths.
Note: For further details on Execution Path Assessment, refer to Section 7: PXP Process.

The process concept is built on the model that leverages industry’s extensive
experience in project planning and execution approaches with proven concepts
and implementation processes for unique and/or repetitive projects.

The conventional CMS process framework and its Efficiency Enablers will
continue to be used including:

• Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)

• Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Team (IPT)

• Front End Loading (FEL)

• Target Setting (TS)

• Value Assurance (VA)

13.2 Objective

The objective of this process is to provide an agile and fit for purpose
framework with development and execution strategies for less complex projects
based on the level of alignment with Company’s core business and
repetitiveness. These strategies for project planning, development, and
execution remain in alignment with existing CMS process while further
enhancing Capital Program efficiency by:

• Optimizing project execution costs through the replication of proven design

in line with industry best practices.

• Providing a cost-focused capital execution process for non-core & unique

projects.

• Maximizing the utilization of Company resources for core vs. non-core

projects.

13.3 Development, Delivery and Governance

13.3.1 Thrift Design

The prime focus of this strategy is to take advantage of cost reduction

opportunities through leveraging intelligent replication of an existing

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 131 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

suitable host design and exploring standards customization,

modularization, and standardization. This strategy has an inherent
advantage of reduced development schedule and is most suitable for
the projects that are repetitive and aligned with the Company’s core
business. Once a project is accepted in the 3-Year Business Plan as
a candidate for Thrift Design, it follows the FEL structure as shown in
Figure 23.

Figure 23: Thrift Design FEL Structure

Key Activities for Thrift Design

The gate objective establishes the required scope and subsequent

activities for each FEL phase.

FEL2/Study Phase activities focus on the project development

aspects including but not limited to the following:

• Host Design Intelligent Replication (HDIR) covering:

o Host Design selection

o Modularization and standardization opportunities

o Need for standards customization

• Formalizing project scope definition

• Cost estimate development (per SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation

Guidelines)

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 132 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

FEL2/DBSP Phase activities focus on the project development

aspects including but not limited to the following:

• Host Design revalidation

• Cost benefit/economic analysis (to validate the selection of the

Host Design)

• DBSP development

• Cost estimate development (per SAEP-25: Estimate Preparation

Guidelines)

FEL3 Phase activities focus on the project development aspects

including but not limited to the following:

• Project Proposal or Detailed Design development (depending

upon scope complexity and choice of the contracting strategy)

• Competitive execution strategy development and endorsement

• ±10% ER Cost Estimate development (Per SAEP-25 Estimate

Preparation Guidelines)

• Contract procurement

13.3.2 Project Proxy Execution

The prime focus of this strategy is to take advantage of cost and

schedule reduction opportunities offered through capitalizing on
technical expertise and in-depth business experience of a specialized
firm to design and build on behalf of the Company.

This strategy allows outsourcing the design and execution to a

specialized firm where the completed facility/project is handed over to
the Company to operate. This process is most suitable for the
projects that are unique in nature and outside of the Company’s core
business and where in-house expertise is limited.

Once a project is accepted in the 3-Year Business Plan as a

candidate for P2E strategy, it follows the FEL structure as shown in
Figure 24.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 133 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Figure 24: P2E FEL Structure

Key Activities for Project Proxy Execution

FEL2/Study Phase activities focus on the project development

aspects including but not limited to the following:

• PDM assessment supported by a cost benefit analysis between

P2E strategy and 3rd-party or alternatives per SABP-A-42 and
SAEP-360 to re-validate the earlier project nomination for P2E.

• Formalizing project scope definition

• Cost estimate development (per SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation

Guidelines)

FEL2/TFR Phase engineering activities focus on the project

development aspects including but not limited to the following:

• Technical & Functional Requirements development

• Budget Estimate development

• Contracting Plan finalization and approval

FEL3/ER Package Development Phase engineering activities focus

on following project development aspects:

• RFP package development

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 134 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• ±10% ER Cost Estimate Development (per SAEP-25 Estimate

Preparation Guidelines)

• Contract procurement

13.3.3 Governance

Thrift Design:

• During FEL2/Study Phase, HDIR Report shall be developed as

part of the Business Case Assessment deliverable.

• IPT Leader shall secure alignment among key stakeholders on the

Host Design selection during FEL2/Study phase.

• If no suitable Host Design is selected during FEL2/Study phase,

the project shall default to follow the conventional CMS. An
endorsement from the PS shall be required to formally document
the change in the development strategy.

• If Host Design revalidation during FEL2/DBSP phase reveals

earlier identified Host Design to be infeasible for intelligent
replication, the project shall be recycled to FEL2/Study Phase to
follow conventional CMS. An endorsement from the PS shall be
required to formally document the change in the development
strategy.

• In cases, where Detail Design package is used for the solicitation

of the bids from the market to develop ±10% ER Cost Estimate in
lieu of Project Proposal package, the package shall be endorsed
by all those stakeholders who are generally involved in Project
Proposal package endorsement.

• Thrift Design shall follow deliverable requirements as stipulated in

the conventional CMS RAPID® Matrix.

Project Proxy Execution:

• P2E shall follow deliverable requirements as stipulated in the

conventional CMS RAPID® Matrix for FEL2/Study Phase.

• During FEL2/Study Phase, PDM Assessment shall be conducted

in accordance with SAEP-360 and SABP-A-042 and the outcome
of the assessment shall be included in the Business Case
Assessment deliverable.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 135 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

• If PDM assessment reveals 3rd-party alternative to be the most

optimal execution strategy, an engagement with the Decision
Maker (MC or BLC) is required at GAS to secure endorsement on
the change in earlier identified strategy to 3rd-party project
execution following requirements stipulated in GI-0020.150, GI-
0030.001 and SAEP-360.

• During FEL2/TFRs, Technical & Functional Requirements

development shall follow SAEP-1350 and SAEP-360.
14 RAPID® Matrix
Note: Print format (A3) RAPID can be accessed via dedicated Link

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 136 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 137 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Document History
14 December 2022 Editorial revision to update management job titles

28 October 2021 Major revision to incorporate contents of SAEP-38, SAEP-40 and SAEP-71 into
SAEP-17. Added new processes for phase merging, digital, replication and
outsourced projects.

21 April 2020 Editorial revision. Changed contact person, added Section 2 (Conflicts and
Deviations), replaced CPED with PMOD

08 December 2018 New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that governs the Capital Management
System (CMS) project delivery process across the project lifecycle from Initiation
to Execution, Stage, and Gate controls and the process for amendments to roles
and responsibilities through the RAPID Matrix.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 138 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment I – Project Sponsor Decision Form

(Click here to download editable file)

(To be completed by change requestor)

CHANGE TITLE

BUSINESS LINE / ADMIN AREA / DEPARTMENT

AFFECTED BI's (direct) AFFECTED BI's (indirect)

CURRENT SITUATION

PROPOSED CHANGE

JUSTIFICATION

INITIATION APPROVAL (Manger or above)

Concurrence: Date:
Approval: Date:
POTENTIAL IMPACT ON ORIGINAL BI (to be completed by IPT Leader)
Potential impact on cost (YES / NO) If yes, include the change in cost

Potential impact on schedule (YES / NO) If yes, include the change in schedule

Potential impact on economics (YES / NO) If yes, include new economics

IPT Leader Name: Signature:

SPONSOR APPROVAL
Approved ⃝ Rejected ⃝
Approval: Date:

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 139 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment II – Project Sponsor Decision Log

(Click here to download editable file)

Change No Title: Impact Date

Brief Description:
Justification: Cost Schedule Economics Initiated Approved
($MM) (Months)

*Note Enclose supporting documents

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 140 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment III – Offline Gate Engagement Template

(Click here to download editable file)

(Dept. initials: letter number)

X BLC Chairman’s approval in lieu of Gate XX

Engagement for “BI-10-xxxxx xxxxxxxx xx”

Address to: X BLC Gatekeeper

This is a request seeking Upstream Business Line Committee Gate X Endorsement to proceed with FELX
XXX phase for the project below:

BI Project’s Title Type ERA ERC Project Sponsor

10-xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx C1 xxx xxx xxxx

In reference to the attached project detailed document, this project objective is xxxxxxx.

Add section: Reason for submitting a White Paper in lieu of conducting Gate Engagement.
“Example: Based on information noted below, we seek your endorsement to proceed to FEL-X phase and waive Gate-
X engagement requirement:
1. List the reasons of submitting the white paper

Attached is the VA report and for any clarifications please contact xxxxx (Project Sponsor)

Concur:

__________________________ _____________________________
XXXXX XXXXXXX
Project Management Office – Manager Project Sponsor

Approval:

_____________________________
BLC chairman
Executive Vice President - XXX
cc: Senior Vice President, XXX
Manager, FPD
Manager, Construction Agency
Attachment: Project Details

PROJECT DETAILS

DOCUMENT PURPOSE

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 141 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

The objective of this white paper is to seek XXX Business Line head approval to endorse xxxxx

CAPITAL ITEM PURPOSE

This budget item is to xxxxxx

PRESENT SITUATION
Xxxxxx

JUSTIFICATION
The primary justification of this budget item is xxxxxxx

ALTERNATIVES (applicable for GAS engagements only)

Xxxxxxxx

DETAILED SCOPE
Xxxxxxxx

PROJECT COST (Cost reconciliation from previous phase must be shown)

Xxxxx

Projects Target Achievements

Driver Benchmark Target At Start Of Achieved At End

Phase Of Phase
Cost XXX XXX XXX
Schedule XXX XXX XXX

PROJECT RISKS
Xxxxx

VA REVIEW OPPORTUNITIES
Xxxxx

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Xxxxx

PROJECT MILESTONES
Xxxxx

PATH FORWARD
Xxxxx

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 142 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment IV – PXP Lenses/Domains Change Request Form

(Click here to download editable file)

New Governance
Proposed MOC for Lenses and Domains Approval Form

PXP Lenses/Domains Change Request From Submittal Date:

Lens Title:
Domain(s) Title
Initiator’s Name
Description of current
situation:
Description of
proposed change:
Justification for
change:
Impact on benefits:
Metrics of benefits
reported:
Type of change  New Lens  New Domain (s)  Modification of existing Lens/ Domain
Championing Org:
Champion’s Name:

Recommended by:

Manager Date
Champion Organization

Concurred by:

Manager Date
Project Management Office Department

Approved by:

Executive Director Date

Engineering Services

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 143 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment V – Value Assurance Process Workflow

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 144 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment VI – Gate Assessment Template

(Click here to download editable file)

BI # xx-xxxxx
FEL-x End of Gate Result Assessment

FEL-x

Parameter (A)
Benchmark
Reference IPT Achie Dev' Remarks
Range
Priority

Agree ved (D –
Driver

Result
Unit

(B)*
(C) (D) A)

xx
x% over IPT Agreed
(Est
Cost Primary $ MM Xx - xx xx xx xx Met or Not met value and x% over
+/- x
reference parameter
0%)
y% over IPT Agreed
Schedule value (larger figure
(ERA-ERC or Secondary Months yy yy-yy yy - yy yy yy Met or Not met of the range) and y%
OS) over reference
parameter
* For A and B type projects where applicable

Variance Justification
Variance Justification (if variance is more than 15% from IPT
Driver
agreement or Reference Parameter
1. Description (monetary impact)
Cost
2.

Schedule 2. Description (time impact)

(ERA-ERC
or OS) 3.

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 145 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment VII – Manufacturer Quality System Screening Checklist

(Click here to download editable file)

Applicable for New Plant Evaluation Request

MANUFACTURER AND MATERIAL INFORMATION
Location
Manufacturer Name Plant ID
(Country/City)

9COM No. Description

Documents
Yes ☐ No ☐
Attached

ENGINEERING SERVICES REVIEW (To be Completed by ID / VID)

Pass
Evaluation
No Minimum Required Documents/Items Yes/No/ Remarks
Criteria
NA
QMS Certification - ISO 9001:2015 -Certificate
1
Certification validity
Quality Personnel Qualifications - -Submittal
Completeness
Qualification records of available required
2 QA/QC personnel -Availability of
key quality
personnel
QMS Documented Information - Latest
documented information determining the
scope of the Quality Management System
“QMS”
(or Quality Manual) which shall include: -Submittal
3
a. Quality policy and objectives Completeness
b. Detailed quality organization chart
c. List of all main QMS processes
d. List of operational procedures

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 146 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

ENGINEERING SERVICES REVIEW (To be Completed by ID / VID)

Pass
Evaluation
No Minimum Required Documents/Items Yes/No/ Remarks
Criteria
NA
Risk Identification and Mitigating
-Submittal
4 Records of actions to address risks and Completeness
opportunities
Management Review - Minutes of last -Submittal
5
management review meeting Completeness
Internal Audits - Internal audit schedule
-Submittal
6 and summary of most recent internal audit
Completeness
records of QMS
Outsourcing-
List of in-house and outsourced -Submittal
7 processes/activities/components including Completeness
control procedures. Provide a list of sub-
suppliers and their locations.
Non-conformance Control - NCR control -Submittal
8
procedure and samples of NCR reports Completeness
Competency and Training - Documented
-Submittal
9 information as evidence of personnel
Completeness
competency and training

REVIEW RESULTS (To be Completed by ID / VID)

Recommendation ☐ Process WF to Conduct Assessment
☐ Process WF to Reject Manufacturer through Desk Review
☐ Return WF to P&SCM to submit complete / correct information
Remarks

Reviewer Peer Reviewer* Division Head*

Name
Specialty
Signature
Date
*Signatory is required if the Recommendation is “Process WF to Reject Manufacturer through Desk Review”

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 147 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment VIII – Manufacturer Technical Screening Checklist

(Click here to download editable file)

Applicable for New/Additional Plant Evaluation Request

MANUFACTURER AND MATERIAL INFORMATION

Location
Manufacturer Name Plant ID
(Country/City)

9COM No. Description

Documents
Yes ☐ No ☐
Attached

ENGINEERING SERVICES REVIEW CHECKLIST - (To be Completed by ES Technical

Division)
N Minimum Required Evaluation Pass
Remarks
o Documents/Items Criteria Yes/No/NA
General
Compliance Letter - Signed -Signed Vendor
compliance letter to mandatory Compliance
1 SA engineering requirements Letter per SAEP-
(MSAERs) and/or International 85
standards. -No Deviation
Company Details - Company’s
history; business scope; -Relevance to
2
manufacturing facility location, size, 9COMs
layout, and production flowcharts.
Products List - List of manufactured
products, and key raw material; -Relevance to
3
classify proprietary / patented or non- 9COMs
proprietary
Organization Charts and Hierarchy -Compliance to
4 - Company and department wise SAMSS/SAES
breakdown; years of experience -Submittal

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 148 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

ENGINEERING SERVICES REVIEW CHECKLIST - (To be Completed by ES Technical

Division)
N Minimum Required Evaluation Pass
Remarks
o Documents/Items Criteria Yes/No/NA
(design / manufacturing / supply) Completeness
(not mandatory for newly
established local manufacturer
defined in SAEP-85)
Reference List - List of previous
installations with size, location, -Compliance to
customer, date, delivered scope, and SAMSS/SAES
5
contact information (not mandatory -Submittal
for newly established local Completeness
manufacturer defined in SAEP-85)
Technical

Product Technical Data Sheets

-Relevance to
Brochures, examples engineering 9COMs
6 drawing, sample design calculations,
-Technical
technical specifications sheet, testing
Limitation
capabilities, etc.

Engineering Design - If engineering

is provided by a partner / parent
company, provide company partner / -Partner
7 parent company brochure defining Approval /
business scope and showing Capabilities
product/service range. Provide
evidence of partnership / alliance.
-Outsourcing
Outsourcing -List of in-house and permitted by
outsourced SAMSS/SAES
processes/activities/components
8 -Controls
including control procedures. Provide
a list of sub-suppliers and their adequacy to
locations. manufacture
targeted 9COMs
-Records of
After Sales Support - Capabilities of previous support;
9 IK and OOK after sale supports (as presence of local
applicable) office; qualified
technicians/engin
© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 149 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

ENGINEERING SERVICES REVIEW CHECKLIST - (To be Completed by ES Technical

Division)
N Minimum Required Evaluation Pass
Remarks
o Documents/Items Criteria Yes/No/NA
eers

1 Product Certification - Products’ -Certificates

0 certificates(s) (as applicable) validity
1 Facility Certification - Facility’s -Certificates
1 certificate(s) (as applicable) validity
Equipment List - List of facility
-Adequacy to
equipment/machinery and tools
1 manufacture and
indicating size and/or capacity for
2 test targeted
major equipment. Specify all
9COMs
limitations (as applicable)

REVIEW RESULTS - (To be Completed by ES Technical Division)

Recommendation ☐ Process WF to Conduct Assessment
☐ Process WF to Reject Manufacturer through Desk Review
☐ Return WF to P&SCM to submit complete / correct
information
Remarks

Reviewer Peer Reviewer* Division Head*

Name
Specialty
Signature
Date
*Signatory is required if the Recommendation is “Process WF to Reject Manufacturer
through Desk Review”

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 150 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment IX – RAPID Matrix for Digital Projects

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 151 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment X – Digital Transformation Project Monthly Report

(Click here to download editable file)

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 152 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use

 Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Standards Committee SAEP-17
Issue Date: 14 December 2022
Next Revision: 28 October 2026 Capital Management System

Attachment XI - Target Setting Deliverable

Section Description

Introduction Recap of project scope and main features

Target Setting This section includes the following and approved by PS and IPT Leader at start of
Meeting outcome the phase:
(Start of the phase) 1. Project Driver: Justification if the driver is Schedule
2. Project Definition
a. Definition of project per WBS
b. List of Standard KPIs tracked
c. List of Project Enablers tracked
3. Input
a. Project Charter, business case, brief, BISI, list of similar BIs and
scope breakdown, LL
b. Decision Maker Input from previous gate
4. Last phase Estimate (Cost and Schedule)
5. Benchmarks:
a. Summary of internal / external benchmarks and industry data /
Market Due Diligence (as available by project stage)
6. Project Targets and Goals
a. Project targets and goals set at phase start
b. Targets Rationale (Improvement vs. historical performance,
Positioning vs. industry)
7. Actions to meet the Targets. Such As:
a. Technical specifications
b. Opportunities identified from PXP
c. Procurement and contracting strategies
d. Further investigation of the differences between current project
estimates and benchmarking data
e. Leveraging Lessons Learned from specific projects
8. Metrics KPI:
a. Standard KPIs to be tracked, target values
b. Enablers
Target Evaluation 1. Set Targets and Goals
(End of phase) 2. Achieved Metrics; based on current phase estimates (cost and schedule)
3. Enablers with actual values
4. Action Plan
5. Explanation of estimate variances versus targets "if variance exceeds 15%"
6. End of Gate Variance Validation Outcome

© Saudi Arabian Oil Company, 2022 Page 153 of 153

Saudi Aramco: Company General Use