Saep 372
Saep 372
Contents
1 Scope .......................................................................... 2
2 Purpose ....................................................................... 2
3 Conflicts and Deviations .............................................. 3
4 Applicable Documents ................................................. 3
5 Definitions and Acronyms ............................................ 4
6 Instructions .................................................................. 6
7 Responsibilities ............................................................ 9
8 Categories of Performance ........................................ 11
9 Root Cause Analysis (RCA) ...................................... 11
Revision Summary ........................................................... 11
Appendix A - PIPI Evaluation Elementsa.1 ........................................................ 12
Appendix B.1 - Personnel Work Experience Evaluation Criteriab.1 ................... 13
Appendix B.2 - Average OIU Personnel Experience Data Sheet ..................... 15
Appendix C.1 - Personnel Job Certification Evaluation Criteriac1 ..................... 16
Appendix C.2 - Personal Job Certification Data Sheet ..................................... 18
Appendix C.3 - Personnel Job Specialization Data Sheet ................................ 19
Appendix D.1 - Job Training Evaluation Criteriad.1 ........................................... 20
Appendix D.2 - Job Training Data Sheet .......................................................... 21
Appendix E.1 - External Assessment Evaluation Criteriae.1.1 ............................ 22
Appendix E.2 - Consolidated Master List (Sample) .......................................... 24
Appendix F - OIU Annual Self-Assessment Evaluation Criteria F.1 ................... 25
Appendix G - SAIF Data Management Evaluation Criteria ............................... 28
Appendix H.1 - KPIs Evaluation Criteria H.1.1 ................................................. 32
Appendix H.2 - OIU Key Performance Indicatorsh.2.1 ........................................ 34
Appendix H.3 - KPIs Approval Documentation (Sample) ................................. 35
Appendix H.4 - KPIs Summary Sheet (Sample) ............................................... 36
Appendix I.1 - RBI Implementation Evaluation Criteria I.1 ................................. 37
Appendix I.2 - RBI Implementation Data Sheet ................................................ 39
Appendix J - Inspection Technology Utilization Criteria J.1................................ 40
Appendix K - Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Evaluation Criteria ... 44
Appendix M - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Process ..................................... 46
Appendix N - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Request Sheet ........................... 48
1 Scope
1.1 This Engineering Procedure specifies the methodology for annual comparative
evaluation of the performance of Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in all Saudi
Aramco operating facilities.
1.2 The output of the methodology described in this SAEP is a Plant Inspection
Performance Index hereafter referred to as PIPI.
1.3 This SAEP covers field inspection activities under the responsibility of
Operation Inspection Units.
1.4 This document also outlines basis for OIUs to gather, maintain and communicate
relevant data required to assure effectiveness of field inspection programs and
integrity of operating facility assets to the Inspection Department (ID) on an
annual basis or any other authorized Saudi Aramco organization as required.
1.6.1 Operation Inspection Units’ activities and data which are not time
dependent.
1.6.2 Operation Inspection Units’ that have not achieved three (3) years of
operating history from date of full turnover to Saudi Aramco with signed
final Mechanical Completion Certificates (MCC).
2 Purpose
2.1 Data driven indication of the preparedness of measures required to ensure the
safety, integrity, and reliability of Saudi Aramco facilities.
2.4 Data to identify centers of excellence and top performers in inspection programs.
3.1 Conflicts
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi
Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER) or industry standards, codes, and
forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering
Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
4 Applicable Documents
Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue,
including Revisions and Addenda. When industry codes and standards, or Saudi
Aramco standards are required for use by Operations Inspection Units for specific
programs under OIU responsibility, they shall become a part of this Engineering
Procedure.
For the purpose of this procedure the terms used herein shall be interpreted as following:
Data Quality Demerit: The score which will be lost (from the achieved PIPI Score) if
the OIU submitted data is found unreliable and not fit to serve the specified PIPI purpose
for the given year. Submitted data shall be reliable, verifiable, accurate, complete, reflect
an up-to-date status, relevant, consistent across data sources, and accessible.
Evaluation Year: The Calendar Year (inclusive from January 1 to December 31) for
which the performance is evaluated.
Late Data Submittal Demerit: Data for each element shall be submitted for the full
evaluation year by January 7th of the following year. If OIU submit the data for any
element after January 7th, the OIU will lose 0.25 for each element. If January 7th of any
year falls on a non-working day, the first Saudi Aramco working day after the 7th
becomes the due date of submittal for that year.
Pending Issues: The unresolved issues, items, or data between Operation Inspection
Unit and the PIPI evaluation coordinator or his support team.
PIPI Evaluation Team: IEU staff, as subject matter experts for PIPI data evaluation
within the guidelines of this procedure. Assignees may change from year-to-year.
Safety Impact Demerit: The score which will be lost (from the achieved PIPI Score)
if the operating Department Safety Record is impacted by any incident as defined by
GI-0006.001, which is traceable to an inspection program in the PIPI year. It is the
responsibility of the OIU Supervisor to accurately report any relevant safety incident for
evaluation by the Staff of Inspection Department, Inspection Technical Support Division
(ITSD), and IEU with responsibility for coordinating the PIPI data processing. Failure to
report may result in a penalty of 10 scores.
6 Instructions
6.1 Guidelines
6.1.4 PIPI evaluation team shall review the data and support documents if
required, and provide the comments to PIPI evaluation coordinator.
Each comment that indicates a deficiency in the submittal shall
reference the applicable document and paragraph number that specifies
the requirement.
6.1.7 Final evaluation of all of the pending issues will be done by evaluation
team, after receiving additional information from OIU within the
prescribed time frame. The results of final evaluation shall be
communicated to the Supervisor, OIU. Any conflicts and
disagreements shall be resolved as per guidelines of this procedure.
6.1.8 Prior to or during the review period, the PIPI evaluation coordinator
can ask for any extra documentation not mentioned in this procedure,
which the coordinator or the evaluation team member may deem
necessary as objective evidence. Requested additional documentation
shall be:
6.1.10 Final report shall be issued to Admin Area Head of the operation facility.
(a) All strength elements and opportunities for improvements within
evaluated OIU shall be highlighted along with recommendations
for improvement.
(b) A comparative performance analysis of OIUs’ programs, within the
company and within their admin area shall be provided.
(c) Common areas of strengths identified amongst top performers
shall be indicated.
6.2.1 OIUs shall submit all relevant data and support documents, to
IEU/ITSD/ID designated PIPI Coordinator. The following timeline
shall apply to the evaluation process:
a) OIUs shall submit all relevant data and support documents, to IEU /
ITSD / ID designated PIPI Coordinator on or before January 7th.
b) Initial review of submittals by the IEU/PIPI Evaluation team
should be completed and communicated to OIU Supervisor on or
before February 7th of following year.
c) OIUs Review of PIPI Evaluation Team Initial review should be
completed on or before February 15th of following year.
d) Submitting any conflict request shall be within two weeks of
receiving the initial score as per Appendices M&N.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372
Issue Date: 2 July 2017
Next Planned Update: 2 July 2020 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.2.2 Data submitted after the due date shall be subject to a Late Data
Submittal Demerit which includes both of the following:
a) Data for elements submitted after above specified due date will
result in loss of 0.25 score for each element impacted. Maximum
demerit is 2.5 score when all ten (10) elements are impacted.
b) Additional data submitted after the above due date without written
request from IEU/ITSD/ID designated PIPI Coordinator will not
be accommodated for evaluation purposes.
6.2.3 The above timeline shall apply and any change from above stated
timeline shall be conveyed in writing by Supervisor, Inspection
Engineering Unit. Review period can be advanced provided that the
final reporting date is not affected.
The evaluation for job certification of full time and contract personnel
associated with the inspection unit shall be per Appendix C.1, using the
OIU data provided per Appendices C.2 and C.3.
7 Responsibilities
7.1.1 Assign an individual or a team that will develop and maintain the data
required for performance evaluation as given in this procedure.
7.1.2 Validate and submit OIU data to IEU for performance evaluation.
7.1.3 Act as primary contact person for communication with PIPI Evaluation
coordinator.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372
Issue Date: 2 July 2017
Next Planned Update: 2 July 2020 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
7.1.4 Ensure the delivery of data to IEU within the time frame provided in
Section 6.2.
7.1.6 Initiates and submit to IEU, Supervisor, any OIU specific PIPI score
issues for resolution as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.2.4 Submit any PIPI score issues raised by OIU to the PIPI Score Conflict
Resolution Committee for resolution as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.3.2 Collect the performance data from all operation inspection units annually.
7.3.3 Distribute the data to the PIPI Evaluation team for their review, collect
the review comments/results from each team member, and compile the
results for each operation inspection unit.
7.3.4 Communicate with OIU Supervisor the initial review results, and receive
further data/clarifications on the pending issues.
7.3.5 Generate the final report showing the company wide performance index
within the prescribed time frame as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.3.6 Develop and maintain annual PIPI evaluation statistics and establish
the company wide gaps and trends.
7.4.1 Review and validate the data and support documents (if requested) for
PIPI criteria, (in their respective discipline).
8 Categories of Performance
The company average PIPI score and each admin area average score will also be reported.
The RCA required in this SAEP shall be performed with one of the below listed
methods. The OIU shall submit RCA to IEU through utilizing Plant Assessment
Module in SAIF. Acceptable RCA methods are:
(a) Fishbone Diagram
(b) Root Cause Tree in TapRoot
(c) Any other RCA method linked to Six Sigma
Revision Summary
24 May 2015 Major revision.
5 June 2016 Minor revision.
2 July 2017 Major revision. The document is revised to address the following requirements:
1. Encourage issuance of Equipment Deficiency Reports for manufacturer inherited defects.
2. Encourage application of approved UAVs in the operating plants to overcome the inspection
challenges and optimize resources.
3 Job Training 10
4 External Assessment 10
Compliance
Code
5 OIU Self-Assessment 10
8 RBI Program 10
A.4
Data Quality Demerit Minus X
Conditions:
A.1 PIPI Evaluation Element: Weights are based on corporate initiatives, best practices identified through
analysis of historical OIU Assessment observations and OIUs recommendations during conducted value
engineering workshops.
A.2 Year-to-Year Improvement Gain: To be calculated after summation of all scores and comparison to
previous year’s PIPI score. Value is full score where department is participating in first PIPI evaluation.
A.3 Late Data Submittal Demerit: Shall be equal to loss of 0.25 score for each element impacted by late data
submittal and forfeiture of corporate evaluation for the data submitted after the specified due date.
A.4 Data Quality Demerit: X shall be equal to loss of the full score for the Element affected by data lacking integrity.
A.5 Safety Impact Demerit: Y shall be equal to loss of 5.0 points which is half the full score for OIU KPI Element.
Evaluation for the personnel work experience shall be performed as per following criterion:
Conditions:
Note: (a) If an employee is transferred from one OIU to another (permanently or temporary), his experience shall be
counted towards the OIU where he has spent more than six (6) months during the PIPI evaluation year.
B.2 Industrial work experience of personnel associated with inspection unit, full time or contracted will be calculated
by dividing the average of the unit industrial work experience of all individuals with maximum Industrial Work
Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. The industrial work experience includes the
employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco process related industries. All personnel including the
experience of support personnel, like clerks, draftsmen, supplementary NDT contractors and inspection staff
shall only be considered if they have completed more than 6-months of service with that specific inspection unit.
Supervisors and PDPs on a rotational training program are excluded from being counted.
B.3 Number of years that the corrosion engineer had worked as professionally qualified or as Corrosion
engineer-in-training within or outside the inspection unit. The corrosion work experience includes the
employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco process related industries. Employees classified as
supervisors or PDPs are excluded from being counted. In case OIU has more than one corrosion engineers,
the one with more experience will be counted.
B.4 Average inspection work experience of personnel associated with inspection unit, full time or contracted
inclusive of NDT technicians will be calculated by dividing the average of the unit inspection related work
experience of all individuals with maximum Inspection Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation
year. The inspection work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco
inspection related industry. Experience of support personnel, like clerks, draftsmen, supplementary NDT
contractors and inspection staff shall only be considered if they completed more than 6-months of service
with that specific inspection unit. PDPs on a rotational training program are excluded from being counted.
B.5 The continuity of supervisory assignment shall be determined by the number of changes in permanent and
acting supervisors of inspection unit within the last three (3) years as determined by Individual Form 8000.
Due to importance of this position, the corporate intent is that supervisor inspection unit should maintain this
position for longer periods and provide reasonable continuity in the management of inspection activities.
Exception:
If the new supervisor fulfill one of the following criteria, change shall not be counted:
- Worked as Inspection Unit Supervisor within Saudi Aramco facilities for a minimum of (3) years.
- The new OIU supervisor is a former OIU employee of the same unit.
Evaluation:
C.4 The operation Inspection unit should be proactive in solving challenging inspection, corrosion and materials
related problems as well as in the development and implementation of the unit KPIs. For this purpose some
of the individuals in the Inspection units should have recognized job specialization certification in various
inspection related disciplines. The diversification of the specialization is a prime requirement. For this
purpose more than one specialist in same discipline will be counted as one. If one individual in the
inspection unit carries more than one specialization certification, each job certification will be counted for
evaluation purpose. The Inspection Unit should have Individuals with any one of the following Job
Specialization Certifications:
Operational Excellence (OE) Assessor Certificate
ISO 9001 Lead Auditor International Certification
ASM-0331 Certification - Principle for Failure Analysis
API 1169 - Pipeline Inspector
API 571 - Corrosion and Materials Professional
API 580 - Risk Based Inspection Professional
API 936 - Refractory Personnel
API Fitness-for-Service, API 579-1/AMSME FFS-1
National Board - Boiler & Pressure Vessel Inspection Certification
AWS - CC Certified Welding Inspector (CWI)
ASNT Level III
NACE Senior Corrosion Technologist
NACE Senior Internal Corrosion Technologist
NACE Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level-3
NACE Protective Coating Specialist
NACE Corrosion Specialist Certification
NACE CP Specialist Certification
NACE Internal Corrosion Specialist (Pipelines)
NACE PCIM (Pipeline Corrosion Integrity Management) Technician
NACE PCIM Technologist
NACE Material Selection/Design Specialist
NACE Chemical Treatment Specialist
If any inspection unit personnel is specialized in any other program than above, acceptability of the
specialization program shall be decided by IEU Supervisor.
OIUs getting support from any other entity (e.g., NATSD) for their corrosion engineering issues are
acceptable for scoring criteria.
Data for Average Personnel Certification shall be provided as per following data sheet:
(See Note-1)
Total-X
Note-1: Courses which do not require certification on completion are not applicable in this section.
Total-X
Total-X
Evaluation:
Total Number of Employees with valid job certifications as per grade code requirements: = (a)___________
Number of professional certification for corrosion engineer: = (b)_____________
Total number of Specializations within the inspection unit: = (c)_____________
Score
E/N Training Evaluation Parameter Criteria
(Max-10)
e-Learning:
individuals who completes min of 4 (or more) e-learning
courses in evaluation year D.2
Conditions:
D.1 Corporate intent is that the inspection units shall continuously develop the professional skills of their
employees. For this purpose, the skill development program of OIUs will be evaluated to assure effective
implementation of professional training programs.
D.2 The evaluation of e-learning courses is based on a minimum of 4 technical e-Learning courses per employee
per year.
D.2.1 Courses shall be counted on per person basis.
D.2.2 Less than 4 courses technical courses per person per year shall not be counted.
D.2.3 Four (4) courses or more by one individual shall be taken as 1 count.
D.2.4 Extra courses by one individual shall not be credited to other individuals in the inspection unit.
D.2.5 SAIF E-learnings are not credited in this element.
D.2.6 Saudi Aramco employees and Contractor (SMP) are required to complete the e-learning.
D.3 The requirement is for a minimum of 2 courses / seminars / workshops per person per year.
D.3.1 More than 2 courses / seminars/ workshops attended by one individual will be taken as 1 count.
D.3.2 Extra courses by one individual will not be credited to other individuals in inspection unit.
D.3.3 The Courses/ Seminars/ Workshops should be announced on the corporate website or via emails.
D.3.4 The safety talks, or workshops held within the inspection units, without corporate announcement and
invitation to other units outside the department will not qualify for consideration under the evaluation
criteria of this procedure.
D.3.5 Relevance of courses attended to engineering inspection will be decided by the PIPI evaluation team.
In case of disagreement between the team and OIU, the issue will be resolved as per guidelines of this
procedure.
D.3.6 This sub-element is only mandated to Saudi Aramco employees. Contractor will not be counted.
Data for personnel: (Training shall be provided as per following data sheet)
Facility Name: ___________________________
Evaluation Year: ______________
1. E-learning evaluation:
Name of the OIU Employee (full
time/contractor) who have completed Badge Course Date
Number
min of 4 technical e-courses. Number Name completed
(See note-1)
Total-a
Total-b
Evaluation:
Total OIU Employee with min of 4 technical e-courses: = (a)
Total OIU Employee with min of 2 technical related Saudi Aramco or OOC courses: = (b)
Conditions:
E.1.1.1 Applies to all observations (Open & Close) and recommendations in the previous 3 years cycle
relating to inspection programs from External Assessment conducted by any one of the following
organizations:
E.1.1.2 The cut-off date for External Assessment to be considered is December 31 st of the year prior to the
PIPI evaluation year. The intent is to allow proponents a minimum of 12 months to close external
assessment observations.
E.1.1.3 Post assessment closure of all observation items to the satisfaction of the Assessment Team Leader.
E.1.1.4 Submit RCA (for ID related observation) to IEU through utilizing Plant Assessment Module in SAIF.
RCA shall be as per Section 9 requirements.
E.1.1.5 Results of the assessment and post assessment closure of action items including RCA
implementation by the OIU are used for the performance evaluation.
E.1.2 The Consolidated Master List of all External Assessment Observations and recommendations shall be
categorized by the responsible external parties and include:
E.1.2.1 The Expected Time to Complete (ETC) agreed with External Assessment Team.
E.1.2.2 Approval by OIU Dept. Manager before March 31st of the Evaluation year.
E.1.3 These criteria shall be applied where open observations relating to inspection programs exist from External
Assessment conducted by any one of the following organizations:
E.1.4 OIU should complete RCA Form (as per SAEP-308, Appendix G) supported by more details and upload in
SAIF. The percentage shown in the table refers to the total of submitted RCA forms versus the total of
trackable observations.
E.1.5 Annual Awareness Session shall be conducted (before December 31 st of the PIPI Cycle year) on the
inspection related external assessment findings’ status for the department. A copy of all presentations at the
session shall be uploaded in SAIF for PIPI Scoring Evaluation. The session shall cover:
E.1.5.1 All items in the department’s “Approved Consolidated Master List of all External Assessment
Observations and Recommendations”
E.1.5.3 RCA and process improvement implemented to prevent re-occurrence of each observation.
Conditions:
Any observation issued during the evaluation year will not be included.
The list shall include all observation (Open & Close) for the previous three (3) years.
Concur: _____________________________________
Concur: _____________________________________
Xxxxxx, Manager
Score Sub-Item
E/N Evaluation Parameter Criteria
(Max-10) Score
0 0
5.1 Identified Strengths. F.2 2 2
≥2 (1 for each
strength)
One SME to lead the
5.2 Lead Assessor. F.3 1 1
self-assessment
One other department
1
participation
5.3 Other department participation. F.4 2
Two other departments
2
participation
Mechanical 0.5
F.5
5.4 Diversity of disciplines. 1.5 Electrical 0.5
Civil 0.5
The percentage of
submitted RCA forms
Submit RCA Form versus the total of = (a/b) * 1.5 1.5
with more details for trackable
5.5 2
trackable observations observations. (F.6.1)
to IEU. F.6
Submit it to IEU PIPI RCA Submission 0.5
review team. (F.6.2)
1st Quarter 1
Conditions:
a: Number of observations with RCA Forms completed and submitted to IEU as required in Section 9
of this SAEP.
b: Total No. of observations
F.1.2 The efforts of operation inspection unit towards effective self-assessment, and identification of the
gaps in all inspection programs established in SAEP-308 that are applicable to the OIU shall be
measured.
F.1.3 The inspection units shall provide the annual self-assessment results to Supervisor, Inspection
Engineering Unit as per requirements of SAEP-308.
F.2 OIU will score 1 for each strength item and the maximum score is two (2). Strengths evaluations shall be
done by the Strengths Evaluation Committee only at year end with all strengths as per the following:
F.2.1 Obtain agreement of OIU Engineering Division head as Champion for each strength item.
F.2.2 Obtain Validation from an external assessor within admin area. Reciprocal validation between
departments will not be accepted.
F.2.3 Submit to IEU PIPI Evaluation Coordinator for review at year end prior to 31 December.
Notes:
Any initiative which fulfills the following requirements will be considered as a Strength:
A. Innovation idea approved by Technology Management Division (TMD) the corporate Intellectual Assets
Management Group, Dhahran.
B. Good Practice or Program or Tool or New Cost Effective Process (with proponent management
documented cost avoidance greater than one hundred thousand dollars per year > $100M/yr.)”
The Strengths submitted under the Category “A” (i.e., related to Innovation Idea) shall only be accepted if provided
with supporting documents such as; ESA, Engineering reports or a Technology Management Division report.
The Strengths submitted under the category “B” requires a realized cost avoidance of greater than $100M/yr
applicable to new Inspection Practice, Process and inspection programs.
Exclusion:
F.3 The leader of the self-assessment should have at least one of the following certificates in order to gain the
credit of one (1) score:
F.4.3 Any department which provides an assessor cannot be assessed by proponent for 2 years.
F.4.4 External Assessor shall meet the qualification requirements for Lead Assessor in F.3.
F.5 Regarding the diversity of discipline, OIU will score 0.5 for each discipline until it reaches the maximum score
(1.5).
F.6 It is required to complete RCA Form (as per SAEP-308, Appendix G) supported by more details for trackable
observations (Immediate, High priority, Medium priority) and submit it to IEU.
F.6.1 The percentage shown in the table is referred to the total of submitted RCA forms versus the total of
trackable observations.
F.6.2 OIU must submit all established RCA forms supported by more details to IEU Supervisor.
F.7 OIU should submit Self-assessment report to IEU PIPI review team. OIU should submit the report in the
1st quarter in the evaluation year to get the full score (1.5).
F.8 OIU shall submit Planning Gantt Chart & Schedule of activities showing the OIU programs and the
name/logon details of the assessor who covered each program.
F.9 OIU shall provide the assessment team members’ assignment letter as issued and emailed by OIU
Supervisor prior to start of the self-assessment.
Score Measurement
E/N Evaluation Parameter
(Max-12) Criteria
6.1 SAIF Training G.1 0.5 Weight*percentage of completed courses
A. 0% T&I overdue = 2.5* Time Factor
B. >0% - 2% = 2.0*Time Factor
6.2 T&I Overdue G.2 2.5 C. >2.0% - 5.0% = 1.5* Time Factor
D. >5.0% T&I overdue or max 10 T&I
overdue whichever is less= 0
Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number
6.3 OSI overdue G.3 2 of CMLs scheduled in a given
year)*Corrosion Class Factor
External Inspections (Mechanical, Electrical, Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number
6.4 2 of planned external inspection in a given
Civil and CP) Overdue G.4
year)*Time Factor
(Number of modules used/ Number of
6.5 Module Usage 1
relevant Modules)
Weight*{100%-(Ax-A)/(Max-A)} if Ax > A
Aging of the defect
notification of Non-T&I 1 Or
or Non-shutdown G.5
Defect Notification Weight*100% if Ax ≤ A
6.6
Usage Weight*{100%-(Ax-A)/(Max-A)} if Ax>A
Inspection response
time of Defect 1 Or
Notification Approval G.6
Weight*100% if Ax ≤ A
A. Submitting at least one valid idea to
enhance the system in one year = 0.25
Note: Total score will be multiplied by the percentage of SAIF master data upload (Technical Object 50%, OSI
Measuring Points 25%, and Inspection Plan 25%)
Conditions:
G.1 Matrix of SAIF e-learning courses required
G.1.1 SAIF e-learning courses are required to be taken once per individual unless there is a change within
the unit employees.
G.2 OIU shall do the actual inspection work + uploading data into SAIF to get the score. ILI Data or Revalidation
test will be equivalent to T&I for pipelines. Any overdue T&I notification shown in SAIF system on the 1st of
January will be counted, even if a deviation request is in-progress. The following criteria will be used to
measure this component:
Time Factor =
Example:
Plant A has a maximum T&I overdue for 14 days, so Plant A has time factor 100%.
Plant B has a maximum T&I overdue for 20 days, so Plant B has time factor 75%.
Plant C has a maximum T&I overdue for 50 days, so Plant C has time factor 50%.
Plant D has a maximum overdue for 65 days, so Plant D has time factor 0.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372
Issue Date: 2 July 2017
Next Planned Update: 2 July 2020 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
G.3 OSI overdue will be measured using this equation: Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of CMLs
scheduled in a given year)*Corrosion Class Factor. Where Wight in the equation = the score of the
component and Corrosion Class factor =
G.4 External Inspection overdue will be measured using this equation: Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total
number of planned external inspection in a given year)*Time Factor. Where each external inspection
discipline will be given 0.5 weight and the time factor =
A. 100% if average overdue time is within (0-10) days and maximum overdue is less than 15 days
B. 75% if average overdue time is within (0-15) days maximum overdue is less than 30 days
C. 50% if average overdue time is within (0-20) days maximum overdue is less than 60 days
D. 0 for other cases
Example:
Plant A has average overdue 8 days, and the maximum overdue is 14 days, so Plant A has time factor 100%.
Plant B has average overdue 8 days, and the maximum overdue is 20 days, so Plant B has time factor 75%.
Plant C has average overdue 18 days, and the maximum overdue is 65 days, so Plant C has time factor 50%.
Plant D has average overdue 22 days, and the maximum overdue is 65 days, so Plant D has time factor 0.
G.6.1 The inspection unit response time will be calculated from the initiation of the defect notification in
system until the approval from the unit field supervisor.
Example:
Company average
Plant No. Average response time Score
response time
A 5 days = 100%
B 8 days = 100%- {(8-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 87.5%
7 days
C 10 days = 100%- {(10-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 62.5%
D 15 days = 100% - {(15-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 0%
A. Submitting at least one valid idea to enhance the system in one year = 0.25
B. Participating in voting system to enhance SAIF = 0.25
C. Participating in test the implementation of the enhancement items = 0.5
G.7.1 To validate and approve an enhancement idea, ID SAIF admin and IT SAIF group has to review
and accept it. The review of each submitted enhancement idea will be done during the PIPI
evaluation.
G.8 Each department shall send a SAIF self-assessment report every six months to ID/ITSD. The report shall be
signed and sent before end of (June/December) of the evaluation year. The report shall be signed by the
unit head and shall include:
Any discrepancies or missing date found during the self-assessment shall be reported to ID SAIF admin
team through remedy system for modification and upload before end of the evaluation year.
Max Score
E/N KPIs Evaluation Criteria
(Total: 10)
Complete KPI for all OIU Inspection programs in SAEP-308 (all twenty-four
7.1 programs) according to proactive elements criteria; and departmental 4
formalization and approval.
7.1.1 MeasurableH.1.2 1
Share KPIs with all OIU Personnel (email or letter) before end
7.1.2 0.5
of Q.1 (March). H.1.3
7.1.3 Identify gaps using RCA for five programs. H.1.4 1.5
Obtain Dept. Manager's Approval following presentation on KPI sheet, before
7.1.4 1
or on 30th April H.1.5
Proactive Initiatives to close identified Gaps including ESA for the 5 programs
7.2 with most improvement opportunities and objective evidence for completed 6
actions required to formalize the KPIs.
Documented corrective actions implemented for each of the top 5 programs
7.2.1 2.5
@ 0.5 score each. H.1.6
7.2.2 Tracking of progress to close gap, 0.1 for each of Top 5. H.1.7 0.5
OIU Department Manager’s Concurrence for Gaps’ Closure before or on 31st
7.2.3 3
December H.1.8
Conditions:
H.1.1 To enhance continuous monitoring and improvement in the various field inspection programs, the operation
inspection unit shall develop “SMART” proactive Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for each inspection
program listed in SAEP-308 that is applicable to the OIU department.
(a) Identify the department inspection programs which offer the most improvement opportunities
(b) Select top 5 challenge programs and identify related gaps through RCA as required in
Section 9 of this SAEP.
(c) Track the practical solutions utilized in incrementally closing identified gaps
(d) Validate closure such that implemented actions can be shared company-wide.
H.1.1.2 Submission shall include a description of the KPI goal, measured item, measurement value,
period covered and OIU target objective for the year as formalized in the 1st quarter and the
actual achieved as documented in the 4th quarter. Only those KPI goals with proven completion
by 100% will be rated and taken into consideration.
H.1.1.3 KPIs implementation evaluation is divided into two subdivisions and measured as per criteria
provided in Appendices H.1 and H.2:
a) KPI Development and Approval - OIU teams of 4-6 unit personnel shall develop KPIs for
each Inspection program according to the process steps for proactivity criteria and securing
departmental approval of the KPIs as required in Appendix H.2.
b) Action Tracking and Validation - Documented proactive initiatives implemented to close gaps
identified in the selected top 5 inspection programs (with the most improvement
opportunities) is required. Typical acceptable documentation shall be Engineering Service
Agreements (ESA) or equivalent (see Appendix H.4). To validate implementation of planned
actions, gaps closure shall be approved by the Department Manager before the end of the
4th quarter (December 31). See Appendix H.3 (B).
H.1.1.4 A good KPI for the Relief Valve Program can be “to have zero (measurement value) overdue
RV’s (measured item) of all RVs due for testing in the year (period covered).” The OIU target will
be the number of RVs due for testing in the year
H.1.1.5 OIU may choose to develop more than one KPI for each program listed in SAEP-308, however,
for the purpose of PIPI evaluation, only one KPI per inspection program is required. The top 5
KPIs selected with department management approval and submitted for the year shall be those
which provide the most improvement opportunities.
H.1.1.6 The KPI, goal, measurement value, measured item or target shall be changed or revised to
provide a stretch goal if the target is accomplished in two subsequent years.
H.1.1.7 The KPI is considered accomplished in the short term if the ratio of actual to target is 100% in two
subsequent years.
H.1.3 Email shall be issued by the unit supervisor to all OIU personnel outlining the KPIs, gaps identified and
proposed action plan. Action shall be completed before the end of the 1st quarter (31st March).
H.1.4 OIU shall identify gaps for the top 5 programs (Top 5 programs are the weakness programs within the unit)
with the most improvement opportunities supported by root causes analysis, which will result in a score of
0.3 point for each identified gap (and 0.3 times 5 for full score = 1.5). To be completed before the end of the
1st quarter (31st March).
H.1.5 Department Manager’s approval as per Appendix H.3 (A), shall be completed before the end of April.
H.1.6 OIU must document corrective actions implemented for each of the top 5 programs selected for closing
identified gaps, each documented CA will result in 0.5 score and full score is 1.5.
H.1.7 Evidence of tracking system used in tracking the progress towards closure of gaps shall gain 0.1 for each of
the Top 5 gaps identified in OIU Department Managers approval letter for the KPIs. The evidence of tracking
shall be proved through monthly or quarterly inspection reports.
H.1.8 Department Manager for OIU shall concur all gaps closure before the end of 4th quarter in order to get the full
point for this parameter (0.6 point for each gap closure concurrence = 3 points total). Appendix H.3 (B),
closure concurrence shall be completed not later than 31 st December. See Requirements in Appendix H.3.
Develop KPIs:
Notes:
H.2.1.1 KPIs submitted by OIU should be based on proactive elements and be SMART.
H.2.1.2 KPI shall be developed by a team with input from key knowledge points in the department
and/or company to evaluate and implement each specific goal.
H.2.1.5 KPIs implementation Plan shall include assignment of a responsible person to review.
H.2.1.6 Include process to Evaluate and Trend collected and analyzed data.
H.2.1.7 Plan, Forecast and indicate action items which can Predictably Close Gaps.
H.2.1.9 Management of Change (MOC) plan shall exist to support any changes which might be
required to close gaps identified.
H.2.1.10 Knowledge gained in developing and implementing each KPI shall be communicated and used
for training, lessons learned, and Knowledge Sharing sessions.
Find attached for your approval are the 2013 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) with target established according
to SAEP-372 requirements for each of the inspection programs listed in SAEP-308 which are applicable at Terminal
Facilities. We have identified the inspection programs with the most improvement opportunities, required action to
close gaps with roles and responsibilities, ETC, and periodic reporting with assigned person to track progress of
implementation.
The top five programs which require increased focus in 2013 are:
1. Training Program; to accelerate five (5) inspectors’ job certification based on new job ladder
2. RBI Program; to complete the remaining RBI studies for ten (10) Yanbu Tanks.
3. Corrosion Program; to utilize the VCI technology to eliminate the underside corrosion of tanks bottom
plates for 40 tanks at Juaymah Tank Farm.
4. Defect Notification (DN); to expedite the implementation of none T&l DNs which are open for more than
one year, total of 80 DNs in list.
5. Inspection Technology Utilization; to deploy (11) proven applicable technologies in TOD.
xxxxxxx, Supervisor
Terminal Inspection Unit /TOD
______________________________
Concur: _____________________________________
Xxxxxxxxxxx, Superintendent, Terminal Enrng. Div.
(A) Approved:______________________________
xxxxxxxxxxx, Manager/TOD
(1) ______% , (2) ______% ,(3) ______%, (4) ______%, (5) ______%
Goal &
Target Actual Performance Remarks/
Measurement Assign for
No. Program ( For Evaluation ( For Evaluation Percentage (%) Documentatio ETC
( For Evaluation reporting
Year ) Year ) (Up to date) n
Year )
Technical
1
Administration
2 Worksheets
Management of
3
Recommendations
Positive Material
4
Identification
5 On-Stream Inspection
Plant Record Books
6
and Files
Equipment Inspection
7
Schedules
8 Relief Valve Program
9 NDT Operations
10 Corrosion Program
Plant and Equipment
11
Inspection
12 Welding Inspection
13 Electrical Inspection
14 Civil Inspection
15 Coatings Inspection
16 Training Program
Involvement in
17 Management of
Change
Cathodic Protection
18 (CP) Monitoring
Program
Risk Based Inspection
19
(RBI) Program
20 SAIF Utilization
Inspection Technology
21
Utilization
High Integrity
22 Protective Systems
(HIPS) Program
23 Non-metallic Program
Community &
24 Operations Support
Facilities
Score Sub-item
E/N RBI Evaluation Parameter Criteria
(Max-10) Score
Submission of an annual plan of evergreen RBI Yes 0.5
8.1 assessments for all process units as per SAEP-343 0.5
requirements (Planned – Ongoing – Completed) I.1 No 0
Completion percentage of required initial RBI
I.2
assessments out of total number of process units
a: total number of completed initial RBI
8.2 2 = (a/b)* 2 2
assessments by December 31st.
b: total number of process units requires RBI
assessment as per SAEP-343.
Conditions:
I.1 A comprehensive plan endorsed by the proponent Engineering Division Head shall be submitted
for IEU review and concurrence by January 31st. The plan shall cover all process units as per
SAEP-343.
I.2 Required RBI assessments as per SAEP-343.
I.3 Consider the initial RBI assessments due for evergreening process per SAEP-343.
Refer to SAEP-343 for evergreening requirements. Post T&I evergreening shall be completed
within 4 months after issuing the post T&I report. Post T&I report shall follow SAEP-1161
requirements.
Data for RBI Program implementation shall be provided as per following data sheet:
Evaluation for inspection technology utilization and commitment to non-conventional inspection technologies
shall be performed as per following criteria:
Technology Awareness & Technical Events conducted in partnership with ID (0.5) 0.5
ESA (1.0) 1
• ( 1 ) : If a facility has one or more TI partnership and one or more ESA
• ( 0 ) : ID requested partnership but facility refused due to circumstances
• ( 1 ) : Applicable if the Technology Awareness and Technical Events are conducted in partnership with ID
• ( 0 ) : Applicable if conducted Technology Awareness and Technical Events without ID partnership
• (NA): If the facility was not asked to partner in a TI or ESA
• Supporting documents must be submitted.
FINAL SCORE
TOTAL SCORE OUT OF ( 5 ) 5.00
ASSESSOR:
PROPONENT REPRESENTATIVE:
LEGEND
LEGEND
Conditions:
J.1 Inspection technologies deliver detailed inspection data on equipment condition that can be utilized for
engineering assessments such as fitness for service (FFS) and improves confidence in the integrity of
operating facilities’ assets. In this procedure, the utilization of inspection technologies is considered a
proactive approach toward improving asset integrity.
The NDT Technology Implementation Assessment scoring is divided into two sections:
Advance NDT Services Utilization: reflects used advanced NDT services during the evaluation year (as
per paragraphs 1.4 and 2.2 of this document).
Commitment towards the Technology Program: evaluates the facility’s effective participation and
commitment toward inspection technology program through TI partnership, technical awareness
sessions/events, and ESA.
For the scores of “1” and “NA” supporting documents shall be provided.
All awarded points should be for technologies or activities deployed during the current evaluation year.
• Score of “0.5” is given for Technology Awareness and Events conducted in partnership with ID.
• Score of “0” is given for Technology Awareness and Events conducted without ID partnership.
• Score of “0” is given if the facility does not have effective participation in the technology program.
If a facility has “NA”, the two points weight will be added to Section (A).
(Activities listed below shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year and associated
confirmation included in submitted data to be considered)
E/N Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Evaluation Parameter Max Score
10.1 Support for Community and Operations Support facilities - (All applicable) K.1 3
10.1.2 Inspection per EIS of Community and Operations Support facilities completed K.3 1
Receive two (2) employees from other departments for training on 6-months
10.2.3 2
developmental assignment K.7
Placement of two (2) OIU employees with other department for 6-months
10.2.4 2
developmental assignment K.8
Present two (2) technical papers at in-company (including other OIU technical
10.2.5 3
workshop) or OOC technical workshop K.9
Report manufacturer discrepancies in form of Equipment Deficiency Reports (as
10.2.6 1
per SAEP-380) K.10
Application of approved UAVs in the operating plants to overcome the
10.2.7 1
inspection challenges and optimization of resources.K.11
Maximum Total Score Required of OIU from above as applicable 12
Conditions:
K.1 OIU in department not providing inspection support for Community and Operations Support facilities shall
obtain all required twelve (12) points from any of the activities listed in 10.2.
K.2 OIU shall complete EIS through SAP for all assigned community and operation support facilities as per
SAEP-309. Evaluation score will be prorated for % of the assigned facilities completed.
K.3 OIU shall inspect all Community and operation support facilities as per EIS. Evaluation score will be
prorated for % of the assigned facilities which were due that were inspected.
K.4 Completion of annual review of Community & Operations Support facilities assigned to OIU and by posting a
comment on e-Standards website re-affirming or updating applicable SAEP-309 section (relating to OIU
only). Completion shall be confirmed by e-Standards website records.
K.5 If OIU claim participation in other OIUs self- assessment, participation shall be confirmed by providing the
transaction email between the two involved units. Conditions:
K.5.1 Participating Assessor shall meet this SAEP’s qualification requirements (as mentioned in F3) for
external assessor during OIU Self-Assessment.
K.5.2 Max of one Assessor per OIU per year shall be credited.
K.6 OIU participation in other OIUs’ T&I, shall be confirmed by the transaction email between the two involved
units. OIU will score 0.25 points for every week of participation during any T&I period in the evaluation year.
To get full Score (2.0) OIU can participate either by one employee or multiple employees.
Example: Assume supported T&I duration is one (1) month, OIU can get full score by participating with two
employee for four weeks (0.25 X 4 X 2 = 2.0) or can participate with multiple employees and
distribute the number of weeks to the employees (two employees participate for 3 weeks each
and another employee for 2 weeks).
K.7 Development assignment slot provided to another department employee for training shall be completed by
December 31 of the evaluation year to be considered and confirmed by approved Form 8000 copy.
This parameter will be measured as per the following:
K.7.1 OIU will score (1) for continuous 6 months slot period for one employee.
K.7.2 OIU will score 0.1 point per month for providing a slot for less than 6 months. Example: OIU will
score 0.4 for providing 4 months slot period. Durations are not cumulative.
K.7.3 OIU shall provide slot for at least two employees to get full score (2)
K.7.4 Maximum one point for any one employee. (Only if that employee stayed for continuous 6 months)
K.8 Development assignment in another department by one (1) OIU employee for 6-months shall be completed
by December 31 of the evaluation year to be considered and confirmed by approved Form 8000 copy.
This parameter will be measured as per the following:
K.8.1 OIU will score one (1) point for sending one of their employees for developmental assignment in
another department for continuous 6 months. Full score for two employees.
K.8.2 OIU will score 0.1 points per month for sending one of their employees for developmental
assignment to another department for less than 6 months, Example: OIU will score 0.4 for sending
an employee to another department for 4 months period. Durations are not cumulative.
K.9 OIU delivery of two (2) technical papers (prorated for three points) at in-company (including other OIU
technical workshop) or OOC technical conference / workshop, shall be confirmed by (a) published workshop
proceeding, and (b) retired business assignment showing physical attendance in the workshop for full
duration. There is 1.5 score for one technical paper.
K.10 OIUs are encouraged to report manufacturer discrepancies in form of Equipment Deficiency Reports (as per
SAEP-380) to Vendor Assessment Unit of Vendor Inspection Division in Dhahran.
K.11 Only the UAV technologies used for inspection purposes and approved by TMD or Inspection Department
shall be credited.
Deliberate privately for 10 minutes and vote on the presented facts only before proceeding
to the next submission
Vote on all submissions and cannot abstain from voting on any item
Initiate Q&A on submissions
4. Any affected party shall not be a member of the Conflict Resolution Committee for the year.
5. OIU Supervisor shall present the OIU perspective of area in dispute (non-standards
interpretation issues) to the Committee in a 10 minutes Question & Answer (Q&A) session per
item. Basis of presentation shall be:
Affected party who disputes ID/ITSD/IEU scoring shall document their rationale and
supporting documents for conflict resolution committee review and the Q&A session
Verbal submission only (lacking filled out Appendix N with all requirements) will be rejected
without review
Issue focused, not personal
Supporting data are available
Affected party shall propose solution options
Standards interpretation issues are outside the scope of the Conflict Resolution Process
and interpretation requests shall be forwarded by the originator in written form to the
Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman for resolution
6. Following submission, the submitting party shall leave the committee meeting room
7. Decision of the committee shall be final.
8. Submitting OIU Supervisor shall be notified of the Committee’s decision at the end of the
meeting day by IEU Supervisor.
9. Committee for the year shall dissolve once the scores are approved by ES, Admin head.
10. The last date to submit any conflict request is on the 20th of February.
OIU Department:
Admin Area:
Submitted by (OIU Supervisor, Name and Network ID)
PIPI Element
SAEP-372, Appendix ……..& Requirement No.
A. Evaluation Team Documented Score
B. OIU Requested Change Score
Variance – PIPI Score Conflict Size (B-A)
________________________________,
Supervisor, OIU
Concur: __________________________________
Xxxxxxxxxxx, Division Head, Engineering Div.