EPC Mindset

Change Order in EPC projects… is almost surely impossible… a gospel especially for Indian EPC.

Many have aspired to change this paradigm, and mostly reconciled after earning a bloodied nose.

Pragmatic approach in EPC projects generally & especially Indian, is to not deviate from Contract and implement whatever Contract / Licensor has specified, unless its outrightly bizarre or has safety or operability issues. If someone has a bright cost cutting idea that requires changing the Contract design, exercise due diligence before commencing that walk. Ultimately, the cost benefit of design modifications need to be passed to the Owner, leaving you with having to consume your precious time ex gratia - for taking the changes through approval processes, preparing change orders and owning up the onus of additional design risk.

EPC Contractor rarely gets to keep the cut.

Rarely…. but not impossible… if one has acquired the knack… an asset.

We’ll see.

?

I too cultivated EPC mindset after getting my nose bloodied.. surest way for it to get imbibed intrinsically in your being. Having done mostly basic design in first half of my career, I was less conscious of the rigidity in Indian EPC contracts, when I started with it 2008. So it happened.

?Our layout team had to increase a column elevation by two meters, that’s fine.

Consequently, we needed to increase the shutoff head of its bottoms pump accordingly.

Instead, we chose to reduce the pump head by two meters, because its sufficiently logical design-wise. Alas ! Big error of judgement, and the resounding repercussions sent us scurrying for cover ... none to be found. We were forced to revert the pump head to its original contractual value. But the lower head pump was already ordered by then. And as fate would have it, increasing the bought pump’s head by this miniscule two meters was not becoming possible. Company had to bear the loss of re-ordering new model, all blame rightfully fell on us.

?When your very first EPC lesson comes with such brutality, that instils in you the EPC mindset permanently… fast & for eternity. When acquired so traumatically, this EPC mindset becomes the asset that I referred to previously. Asset to save cost in EPC project.

Licensor had specified a PSV to protect the Air Cooler against fire case scenario. That’s unusual.

Logically & contractually, we should have just proceeded to buy this PSV - without attempting to thwart its inclusion in design. After all, Contract ask for it, Licensor specified it and it was part of our obligation to provide it.

Problem was that because this PSV is provided on the liquid filled line, initial relief from this PSV was bound to be liquid, gradually transitioning to 2 phase and then to fully vapor. Relief being possibly liquid, necessitated provision of some facility to handle this liquid inside the Process unit – as stipulated by the Design criteria. But there wasn’t any liquid separation facility on flare system inside this unit.

Going ahead with this PSV would have encumbered us to add a Flare Knock out Drum (KOD)… with no possibility of getting paid for it from Client. That’s the nature of the beast… the EPC Contracts, especially where FEED Verification has already been done by Bidder prior to taking on the Contract.

Adding Flare KOD is significant cost, surely would have put the project in red. We had to do whatever needed to prevent this harakiri.

Root cause of the situation was this PSV, provided to protect the liquid filled air cooler against fire scenario.

We had to try and remove this root cause.

?

API-521 does suggest that all air-cooled exchangers located directly above pipe racks are generally excluded from Fire case scenario. But this is a dilute statement, only a suggestion. It gives a direction, but does not make it mandatory to walk in that direction. Could not be relied upon to make our case for deleting this PSV.

API-521 also states that Fire Case scenario necessarily applies for Air Coolers with Induced Draft fans in liquid service.

Thankfully, we were not using Induced Draft fans, so this didn’t apply for us.

API-521 also mentions that for Air Coolers with Forced Draft fans in liquid service, Fire Case scenario applies selectively - if Air Cooler is located within 25 ft from grade or any other surface at which a major fire could be sustained, such as a solid platform.

Our air cooler was located much higher than 25 feet…. good ! Now we had to ensure that there’s no solid platform below it, to prevent surface that could accumulate liquid that could contribute to fire. Solid platform or grating below air cooler was a design prerogative either way justifiable by designer. So, to justify no solid floor below it, we researched further and came across following clause in API 661 (Air Coolers)

Open grating should be used for the maintenance floor underneath the fan inlets to reduce air-side pressure drop. If solid plate is used, the effect on air-side pressure drop should be taken into account.

This was heartening.

We went ahead with design without solid floor below the Air Cooler, and ensured there no pump/equipment handling Hydrocarbons below it. This design improves the air side efficiency of air cooler, justification sufficient to satisfy the Owner. Then we approached the Licensor explaining that we need to remove this PSV as it violates API-521, explaining all the logic. Licensors would generally accept deviation only if corroborated by Standard & Codes, as also happened in this case where Licensor saw the logic we proposed and agreed to remove this PSV.

Big Relief !

By removing this PSV, we prevented addition of Flare KOD, and in the process deleted the PSV and also the solid floor below the air cooler. Very cost friendly.

EPC mindset is like acquired taste, with certain je ne sais quoi… something that cannot be explained easily.

Requires combination of knowledge, grit & astuteness that comes with experience. Familiarizing with specific contract stipulations is a priority, as also the need for one to be familiar with relevant API standards and Codes. These keep getting updated, and there’s always something significant incorporated in every update. Keeping oneself updated with the changes, is a differentiator. In EPC line of work, knowledge is the basic pre-requisite, that gets compounded by intelligence to apply it craftly. What do you say ?