Decision gate

Pritchard JF, Jurima-Romet M,Reimer ML, etal. (2003) Makingbetter drugs Decision gates in non-clinical drug development. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2 542-553. 

J. F. Pritchard, M. Jurima-Romet, M. L. J. Reimer, E. Mortimer, B. Rolfe, and M. N. Cayen, Making better drugs Decision gates in non-clinical drug development, Nature Rev. Drug Discovery 2 (2003), 542-553. 

In order to understand how SHE is managed in an offshore project, we first have to look at how the total project period is split into separate phases. Figure 27.2 shows the phase model applied by Norskoil in the Ymer project. In order to continue from one phase to another, the project has to pass so-called decision gates. This involves meeting certain criteria, which are different for each decision gate. 

A project division within Norskoil carries out project work. At the first decision gate (DGl), the market organisation of Norskoil, i.e. the client, commissions the project division to start up project work. Before-hand, the client has made the necessary initial evaluations of the potential resource basis of oil and gas and of the market. The scope of work of the feasibility study also has to be defined. This phase aims at demonstrating whether it is technically and economically feasible to develop the field. The project team establishes detailed reservoir models in order to assess the oil and gas reserves and to establish production rates over the field s expected lifespan (production profiles). In parallel, the project evaluates different field-development concepts such as fixed platforms, floating platforms and subsea developments for tie-in to existing platforms in the area. This evaluation is based on information about existing infrastructure, water depth, reservoir models, etc. The activities are documented in a Report of Commerciality. 

Norskoil decides to select a semi-snbmersible platform concept for further development of the Ymer field. At the second decision gate (DG2), Norskoil s board of directors makes the project go decision. To pass this gate, the investment plan has to show adeqnate profitability. This impHes that the capital and operational expenditures as well as the revenues from production of oil and gas are known with adequate certainty. It is here necessary that the project s scope has been adequately defined. The platform concept and the subsea and pipeline installations must be defined at an adequate level of detail. 

Decision gate four (DG4) involves the go-ahead for start-up of production of oil and gas. Norskoil s operations organisation is responsible for this decision. All essential processes, drilling, utility and safety systems must be ready, as well as the organisation and the procedures for the operation of the platform. Production also involves maintenance and modifications of the installation. Again, Norskoil as the operator has the main responsibility for safety during all these activities. 

The project s SHE manager is responsible for the SHE programme and has to update it for each new phase. It must reflect the criteria that have to be met at each decision gate. The initial SHE programme, which is established at the start of the feasibility study phase, must address the following questions (DGl) ... 

At the next decision gate (DG2), the project must be able to show that there are satisfactory answers to the following questions ... 

The SHE programme for the main study phase will address the need to mature the development concept further with respect to SHE and to develop the necessary tender and contract documents. At the end of this phase, the project must be able to give adequate answers to the following questions in order to pass decision gate three (DG3) ... 

Decision gates in the form of project technical reviews must be described in the SEMP. Technical reviews are essential to ensure that the system being developed will meet requirements, and that the requirements are understood by the development team. Formal reviews are essential to determine readiness to proceed to the next stage of the system life cycle. This is essential for stakeholder acquisition professionals who must pay vendors for completion of work at specified stages of completion, and for project managers who must deliver documents, hardware, software, and other system components on a predetermined schedule. The number and frequency... 

Throughout the decision gate review process, the tools of safety must be integrated into the systems engineering methodology to ensure that... 

The purpose of the Project Assessment and Control Process is to determine the status of the project and direct project plan execution to ensure that the project performs according to plans and schedules, within projected budgets, to satisfy technical objectives. This process evaluates at periodic intervals (such as the decision gates discussed above) the progress and achievements against requirements plans and overall business objectives. 

The purpose of the Decision Manag ent Process is to select the most beneficial course of project action where alternatives exist. This process is employed at any time in the project life cycle where the d and for a stakeholder decision exists, whatever the nature or source of that d aud, in order to reach specified, desirable, or optimized outcomes. Alternative courses of actiou are analyzed, and a roadmap is selected and executed. Decisions made, and their supporting rationale, are recorded for future scrutiny. Milestones and decision gates mark the most formal events of the Decision Management Process. Less formal decisions allow less formality however, all decisions must be documeuted, along with the supporting rationale, to support future decision making. 

Schedule risk Schedule risk exists if decision gates such as PDR must slip because hazards identified in the Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) cannot be reduced to an acceptable level, or if the review of safety deliverables is delayed. It may manifest itself at the system, subsystem, or itan level. 

---