Project Completion Report

Project Summary

Client: Rio Tinto Contract No.: PE500696/M/CC/1000

PROJECT DELIVERABLES TARGET ACTUAL

Safety Nil Incidents Nil Incidents

Scope As per Contract + 15 V.O’s

Schedule Completed 30/08/11 20/04/12

Budget $1,360,899 $1,640,206

Margin $238,157 (17.5%) $334,452 (20.4%)

Quality Nil NCR’s 1 NCR

Customer Satisfaction Score 5 4

Project Pictures – Pre Install

Rio Tinto / BP Fuel Farm Train Decant Line

Project Pictures – Pre Install

The Rockwall Old Pumping System

Project Pictures – Pre Install

The Tank Farm Fuel Manifolds The Inlet Pipe and Electrical Conduits

Project Pictures – Civil Works

Forming Up Pump Bunds Pump No.3 in Bund

Project Pictures – Electrical Works

The New MCC Electrical Conduit Runs on Inside of Bund

Project Pictures – Mechanical Works

Tank No.3 Manifold with Site Welds Lifting in Main Tank Farm Manifold

Project Pictures – Mechanical Works

Site Welds for New Valve Install Lifting in Pipe using Hiab

Project Pictures - Issues

Freight to Site Pipe/Flanges not Aligning

Project Pictures – Issues

Incorrect Supply of PRV’s Low Pressure Loop Delivery

Project Pictures – Issues

Incorrect Specification Butterfly Valves

Incorrect Specification Check Valves

Project Pictures – Issues

Incorrect Specification Camlocks Pump Orientation / Rotation

Project Pictures – Issues

Under Engineering of Bracket Fixings

Additional Support Brackets

Project Pictures – Installation

Project Pictures – Installation

Project Pictures – Wet Commissioning

Project Summary

Safety and Environment

Target – Nil Incident Actual – Nil Incident

Comments

• Repetitive Manual Handling ( Lifting Pipe, Aligning and Bolting Up), Working at Heights, Rigging and Lifting, Hot Works.

• Category #2 Risk Assessments, Rio Tinto CMS, Toolbox Meetings, Take 5, JHA, Major / Minor Permits, ERP, Traffic Management Plan.

• Cheetah Gloves, Telehandler and Hiab, Fork Lift, Clean Up Kits.• The GF Engineering Welding went to the Medical Centre suffering from minor

heat stress and checked out by Rio Tinto – he was able to return to work.• Emergency Response Plan and Traffic Management Plan are in Project File.• Availability of the correct hire equipment could be a Safety issue on future

projects.

Project Summary

Scope of Works

Target - Original Contract Scope of Works Total Number of SCN’s 22 Total Approved 15

Comments

• 4 Rejected SCN’s were added into new SCN’s at the request of the Client.

• Value of SCN’s raised = $279,307.

• The time taken to estimate the Rejected SCN’s was expensed against the project.

• The Contract only contained the Rio Tinto Scope of Works and did not match the original bid. It was difficult to argue exclusions.

• The response time for SCN’s was considerably slow by Rio Tinto.

Project Summary

Schedule

Project Summary

Schedule

Original Contract Delivery 30/08/11 Actual Practical Completion – 20/04/12

Comments• The Delivery of the IFC Drawings on the 1/6/12 and subsequent issues with the

accuracy of the drawings significantly delayed the Project. A Site instruction from Rio was issued to proceed with drafting on 29/7/11 but then changed and orders were not placed until 18/8/11.

• SCN 003 for additional works to the MCC was issued on the 14/07/11 and approved on the 29/08/11 – this determined the Site Mobilisation Date.

• 1st Delivery of Pipe scheduled to arrive on the 23/11/11 - delivery arrived on the 26/11/11.

• 2nd Delivery of Pipe scheduled to arrive on the 1/12/11 - delivery arrived on the 3/11/11.

Project Summary

Schedule

Original Contract Delivery 30/08/11 Actual Practical Completion – 20/04/12

Comments

• The draining of the Decant Line lost approximately 4 days.• The additional welding of the Low Pressure Loops took 6 days.• The Client agreed for Aerison to demobilise and carry out 2 Stage Install.• 600 additional site hours gained through variations.• Budget Hours were 1356 – Total Site Hours was 2491 (ex supervision).• Overnight Freight (Toll Ipec) was very unreliable with deliveries.• Other delays included Permit System, Rail Possession, Ambiguity in Site Rules.• The time of year significantly effects performance of the Site Crew.• The Final Project Completion was held up by a planned Electrical Outage and

TQ’s regarding drawings to Symmetrical.

Project Summary

Budget and Margin

102 202 202 203 301 603 711 721 723 751 755 756 757 758 759 775 776 787 791 812 813 833 9010.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

5000H - Tom Price Fuel Unloading Upgrade

Original BudgetGross Total BudgetEstmated Final Cost

% o

f Bud

get

Project Summary

Budget and Margin

Original Contract Sum $1,360,899 Expected Final – $1,640,206Original Contract Margin $238,157 Expected Final - $334,452

CommentsOver budget items were:-• 7-11 Construction Management – New Project, 3 Client Project Managers,

Increased and Rejected Scope, New to Organisation. • 3-01 Site Labour - delays. • 7-55 Accommodation – additional hours and higher accommodation costs. • 7-58 Tools – no allowance for specialist tools and hire equipment. • 7-75 Freight – additional cost for cradles and return of cradles.

Under budget items were:-• 1-02 Equipment for other works – double ups in the budget estimates. • 2-03 Fabrication Subcontract – carried out our own Hydro Static Testing. • 7-51 Cranage / Vehicles – the methodology of works changed and we used

smaller equipment.

Project Summary

Quality

Target – Nil Quality Issues or NCR’s Actual 1 NCR (Internal)

Comments

• The internal NCR was raised to highlight an issue regarding the supplying and installing of ‘Non Specification’ Valves. This highlighted issues with our Organisation and GF Engineering.

• A 25NB Site Weld failed when reconnected to the Fuel Line.• The 25NB Pipe Spools did not arrive in the configuration as originally planned.• The Suction Pipe Spools were not correct to the drawing sizes and required

spacers.• A Rockwall Spool was too short and flanges in wrong position – error in the

drawing.• Discharge Tee Piece from Pump No.3 was 50mm short.• Client Response to Technical Issues.• Contract Review and Handover.

Project Summary

Human Resources

Comments

• Availability of Internal and External Resources was an issue (Asset Services and HR)

• 2 Contractors failed the RTIO Lockholders Course and not taken to site.• The Rio Tinto Contractor Management System requires considerable

administration time – both from Aerison and Rio Tinto.• The Sub Contracted Coded Welder from FT&P was slow and not a ‘Team Player’.• HR performed well with arranging Inductions and CMS documentation later in

the project – worked directly with Rio Tinto Coordinator.• The Mobile Accommodation Unit was not appropriately equipped, small and not

an ideal option for long periods of site works.• The Contract requested 2 Aerison Employees with Senior First Aid Training – we

had only 1.• Availability of Qualifications, Licences, Tickets, Email addresses from HR was an

issue.

Project Summary

Communications

Comments

• Communication with Client was daily including weekends.• Tools for Communication should be negotiated during bid and the site facilities

and location taken into account - Printers, Scanner, Fax, Etc. The Site was managed by BP and the Rio Tinto facilities were much further away.

• Initially, the Supervisor was not allowed to leave the site without the team stopping work.

• The Site Supervisors main tool is the mobile phone – when working on hydrocarbons projects you are not allowed to carry it on site.

• Communication with Delivery Drivers and Toll IPEC was an issue.• The Daily Toolbox Meeting – template to be discussed.• Clarification on Technical Issues and OHS was lost though the Rio

Communications Network. Rio Tinto then consulted BP then advised their Supervisors without notifying Aerison.

Project Summary

Client Satisfaction

Target – Score of 5 with Client Survey Form

Comments

• Feedback E-mails and Feed Back Form were very positive.

• Rio Tinto Feedback indicated that we exceeded on Management Commitment, Site Supervision, Response to Work. Requests, Ability to Respond to External Factors, Compliance to Quality Systems.

• Feedback regarding arrival of documentation ‘Met’ Customer Satisfaction.

• Feedback from Sub Contractors?

• Feedback internally?

Project Summary

Lesson Learnt

• Technical Query’s using the TQ Template to monitor Client Response time.

• Greater emphasis looking at Pre Fabrication before going to site – site works includes accommodation, meals, Ute Hire, Higher Rates. The Pumps could have included the associated Pipework, PRV’s and Low Pressure Loops.

Project Summary

Project Completion

Unfinished Business

Comments

• Thank You Letter

• Bank Guarantees

• Future Business or Related Projects

• Aerison Procedures