SAEP-26

Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 21 April 2012 Page 1 of 30 Primary contact: Rahbar, Faramarz on 966-3-8745011

CopyrightSaudi Aramco 2007. All rights reserved.

Engineering Procedure SAEP-26 22 April 2007

Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines

Document Responsibility: Project Support and Controls Dept.

Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Introduction................................................... 2 2 Applicable Reference Documents................. 3 3 Methodology................................................. 4 4 Responsibility/Workflow................................ 8 5 Data Collection............................................. 10 6 Reporting and Analysis................................ 11 7 Exhibits........................................................ 13 Exhibit I............................................................... 14 Exhibit II.............................................................. 17 Exhibit III............................................................. 19 Exhibit IV............................................................ 20 Exhibit V............................................................. 24

Document Responsibility: Project Support and Controls Dept. SAEP-26 Issue Date: 22 April 2007 Next Planned Update: 21 April 2012 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines

Page 2 of 30

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

This Engineering Procedure serves as the framework to ensure that the Benchmarking Process is a continuous and seamless process and is incorporated as an integral part of the planning and execution of Saudi Aramco Capital Projects and reach parity with Best in Class. Saudi Aramco has an imperative to transform corporate performance into "Best in Class." To reach full parity with the "Best in Class", the Company must constantly "Measure (against the Industry), Assess, and Improve" and keep repeating the process. It also measures the Company performance with the Industry in the same line of business. Benchmarking process will focus on identifying aspects of the project that are not in line with the industry.

1.2 Definition

A Benchmarking Study is performed on a project to compare that project's cost, schedule, FEL (Front-End Loading), Operability, etc. to similar projects within Saudi Aramco as well as the industry. Saudi Aramco has re-engineered the benchmarking process to enhance the quality of data and maximize benefits of results. The benchmarking process will be centralized so that all benchmarking activities are managed through Project Control & Estimating Division of Project Support & Controls Department (PS&CD/PCED). PS&CD/PCED will work with SAPMT to identify projects that will be benchmarked at study phase, late stages of the DBSP, at the 90% Project Proposal, or at mechanical completion of a project.

1.2.1 Internal Benchmarking

Internal Benchmarking shall be performed on selected projects (except buildings, pipelines rehabilitations, master appropriations, and home-ownership) based on mutual agreement between PS&CD/PCED and SAPMT. Key project data shall be provided by SAPMT to PS&CD/PCED for internal benchmarking purposes. A sample of benchmarking data sheet is shown in Exhibit IV. This internal benchmarking data will be part of the ER Estimate package.

1.2.2 External Project Benchmarking

External project benchmarking analysis is performed for selected projects by an outside consultant. This benchmarking analysis is intended to help the project team assess the completeness of project scope. The benchmarking analysis provides further support that the project is ready for the next phase. This guideline explains in detail


Page 3 of 30

criteria for selection, methodology, timing, data collection, and reporting/analysis for external project benchmarking.

1.2.3 External System Benchmarking

System benchmarking analysis is performed on selected projects by an outside Consultant based on type and size of the project. The system benchmarking will be conducted every two years or as necessary using a mix of various types and sizes including projects that have been already benchmarked explained under 1.2.2. This sample provides a historical overview of Saudi Aramco's capital projects performance over the life cycle of the projects. Selected projects may be at various stages of execution. In this study "key" inputs mutually agreed between PS&CD/PCED and Consultant as drivers of project performance of a representative cross-section of projects are compared against:

Industry-wide sample of projects, comparable in size and complexity, executed by Industry Average.

A group of projects similar in size and complexity executed in the Gulf Region (GCC) or the Middle East.

A group of projects similar in size and complexity executed by one competitor (an integrated oil company) that have achieved excellent results, named the Best in Class or Class "A".

These "key" inputs include at least the level of project definition quality, or front end loading (FEL), the role of value improving practices, and the level of team development.

2 Applicable Reference Documents

The latest edition of the following applicable reference documents shall be applied:

Sauudi Aramco Engineering Procedures

SAEP 12 Project Execution Plan (PEP) SAEP-14 Project Proposal (PP) SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation

& Revision Procedure


Page 4 of 30

Saudi Aramco General Instructions

GI-0020.500 Expenditure Control Expenditure Request Forms

GI-0216.965 Cost Distribution Rates

Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs)

3 Methodology

3.1 Project Selection

Saudi Aramco will internally benchmark selected capital projects, as mutually-agreed upon by PS&CD/PCED and SAPMT, using the internal database which has been developed by PS&CD/PCED. However, PS&CD/PCED will coordinate with SAPMT to identify projects to be externally benchmarked. PS&CD/PCED will perform the leading role for the selection of the Consultant and development of benchmarking criteria and implementation of the formal benchmarking study.

The analysis shall commence at the appropriate stage of the project, preferably before approval of the DBSP, comparing key parameters of the project with an external industry-wide database. The risk analysis will address key project outcomes and associated risk based on the available information. PS&CD/PCED will make the determination of what projects will be subject to either external or internal benchmarking.

External Benchmarking Selection Criteria

PS&CD/PCED will coordinate with SAPMT to identify projects with value of $100 MM or greater to be benchmarked. Projects less than $100 MM may be benchmarked if related to core business and deemed necessary by PS&CD/PCED and SAPMT.

The following projects are excluded:

Pipeline Rehabs Master Appropriations Home Ownership Buildings Marine Vessel Projects Utilities as stand-alone projects


Page 5 of 30

3.2 Benchmarking Stages

Project Benchmarking will be done at the following stages:

During the latter part of the Study Phase (FEL 1) At first draft of DBSP (FEL 2) At 90% Project Proposal (FEL 3) At Project Close-out Operability Review after facility has been in operations for 12 months

3.3 Work Breakdown Structure

Benchmarking will reflect the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) identified in SA benchmarking models. The Consultant has a set of checklists similar to Saudi Aramco BM Models which will be forwarded to Saudi Aramco. These will be reflected and Saudi Aramco Models will be aligned with the Consultant's models. Benchmarking must also reflect Saudi Aramco's project types and subtypes attached to this document.

Consultant's Report Format will be structured to present a balanced approach between Scope/Cost/Schedule Data and other Value Added and Best Practices. In addition, the WBS identified by the Benchmarking models and project types and subtypes. The Benchmarking process and report (refer to Exhibit V) must be structured, organized to provide benchmarks and recommendations according to the following structure:

3.3.1 Project Output Capacity

Saudi Aramco projects must be benchmarked with similar projects in the industry taking into account the project capacity output. Saudi Aramco is interested in a benchmark of a small data set with similar project

STUDY

operation for at least six months)(At 90% PP) (At First Draft of DBSP)

Project Proposal Start-up Operations

FEL-1 FEL-2 FEL-3

Detail Design / ProcurementConstruction

"Screening Review" Benchmarking

(During Study Phase)

"Closeout Review"Benchmarking

(After Facility has been in "Readiness Review"

Benchmarking"Pacesetter Review"

Benchmarking "Closeout Review" Benchmarking"Operability Review" Benchmarking

ERAMC OS


Page 6 of 30

capacity versus a large dataset with capacity not indicative of the project being benchmarked.

3.3.2 Project Type and Subtype

A list of Saudi Aramco project types and subtypes is attached in Exhibit III. The benchmarking process needs to select only industry projects and process units that are similar and adhere to this WBS.

3.3.2.1 Upstream Projects

GOSPs Flowlines & Trunklines (Gas) Flowlines & Trunklines (Oil) Flowlines & Trunklines (Water) 3 Leg Wellhead Jacket 4 Leg Wellhead Jacket 6 Leg Wellhead Jacket 8 Leg Wellhead Jacket Non ESP Wellhead Deck ESP Wellhead Deck Offshore Trunklines Offshore Flowlines Subsea Cables Subsea Tie Backs

3.3.2.2 Downstream Projects

Gas Processing Facilities a. Gas Plant

Refining Units a. Crude Production Facility b. Sulfur Recovery Unit c. FCCU d. VGO Hydrotreater e. Naphtha Hydrotreater f. Kerosene Hydrotreater g. Diesel Hydrotreater h. CCR Platformer i. Isomerization Unit


Page 7 of 30

Infrastructure a. Cross Country Pipelines (Gas) b. Cross Country Pipelines (Oil) c. Cross Country Pipelines (Water) d. Process Automation e. Substation f. Bulk Plants g. Water Treatment Plants

Cogeneration Facility a. Cogeneration

3.3.3 Project Location

The benchmarking analysis need to reflect datasets for projects in similar locations and provide benchmarks that evaluate Saudi Aramco's performance as it compares to:

Saudi Aramco Standard vs. Industry Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries (these include: Kingdom

of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the Sultanate of Oman).

Best in Class 3.3.4 Inside/Outside Battery Limits

The benchmarking data needs to differentiate between the Inside Battery Limits (ISBL) and Outside Battery Limits (OSBL) parts of the project where relevant. The dataset and the benchmark report need to provide performance and recommendations separately for these two areas where relevant. The report must be structured as such.

3.3.5 Grass Root or Revamp/Expansion

The benchmark report must identify whether the project is a Grass Root Project or an expansion/ revamp of an existing facility. The industry projects used for benchmarks must be of similar nature as the Aramco project being benchmarked.

3.3.6 Project Exclusions

The benchmark report and analysis must exclude factors specific to Saudi Aramco such as long transmission lines, excessive infrastructure outside the OSBL, Long road or highways to reach the site, security fences, flood lights, etc.


Page 8 of 30

4 Responsibility/Workflow

4.1 Responsibility

PS&CD/PCED shall be responsible for the selection of projects to be benchmarked, data collection, and coordination with the SAPMT, FPD, Benchmarking Consultant, and other parties. External benchmarking studies will be conducted by the Consultant in accordance with the benchmarking workflow discussed in section 4.2. PS&CD/PCED will share the draft report with SAPMT, and discuss and agree with SAPMT any comments and/or measures necessary to implement the consultant's recommendations. PS&CD/PCED will respond to the Benchmarking Consultant who will then issue the final agreed report.

4.2 Benchmarking Workflow

The following sections outline the workflow that will normally be followed to implement benchmarking:

4.2.1 Identify Candidate Projects

PS&CD/PCED will identify suitable candidate projects to undergo either external or internal benchmarking and identify Timing and Frequency to allow benefits from feedback. Projects will be selected based on type and size.

4.2.2 Select Projects for Benchmarking

PS&CD/PCED will review the candidate projects with SAPMT and agree on selected projects for external benchmarking and determine a likely start date for initiating the benchmarking process. SAPMT must appoint a designee for contact and coordination. This person will usually be the Senior Project Engineer.

4.2.3 Establishment of a Work Order through ASC

PS&CD/PCED will establish a work order with the Benchmarking Consultant. A contract will be set up between ASC and the Benchmarking Consultant to serve this need. The consultant fees will be paid out of TC-68 funds reserved for this purpose for FEL-1, 2 and 3 benchmarks and from approved ER funds for projects under execution.

4.2.4 Data Gathering Cycle

Required metrics and data will be collected for the benchmarking effort at any given stage of a project, Study Phase (FEL-1), DBSP (FEL-2), Project Proposal (FEL-3) and Project Close-Out.


Page 9 of 30

The Benchmarking Metrics for each type of project is shown in the attached Exhibit. So far as is practicable, required data will be automatically downloaded from PMIS. At the FEL Stages, the intent is to centralize the data collection effort and ensure consistency.

All cost and schedule data will be provided by PS&CD/PCED and SAPMT according to availability. Any additional data, e.g., schedules (level 1, 2 or 3[Primavera format]), construction productivity, quantities, constructability, safety, contractor data, Best Practices, Value Improvement Practices, etc., will be obtained from PMT or FPD, as required.

On receipt of the Work Order the Benchmarking Consultant will prepare additional to the Standard questionnaire a Saudi Aramco specific questionnaire. This Questionnaire will be prepared based on the agreed metrics appropriate to the project status. The questionnaire will be issued to PS&CD/PCED who will coordinate its timely completion with SAPMT. Based on recent discussions with the Benchmarking Consultant, it is expected that this questionnaire will be complementary to the data collected and additional input required by the consultant to perform his analysis.

Upon completion of the questionnaire, PS&CD/PCED and a designated SAPMT contact person will forward this data to the Benchmarking Consultant. An interview of the Project Team by the Benchmarking Consultant will be scheduled at an agreed time and location.

4.2.5 Review Cycle

Following the interview, the Benchmarking Consultant will prepare his report and submit it to PS&CD/PCED and the SAPMT contact person. It is expected that about four weeks would normally be required to prepare the report. At approximately two weeks an interim progress meeting will be held at the consultant's office or other locations mutually agreed.

4.2.6 Draft & Final Report

All benchmarking requests and draft or final reports should compare Saudi Aramco's deliverables with the industry during all the benchmarking phases, study, DBSP, project proposal and execution.

Draft and Final Reports will specifically address the following issues:

Assessment of scope clarity;


Page 10 of 30

Completeness and quality of data available at preceding project phases (FEL-1, 2, 3) if any;

Scope evolvement between study, DBSP and Project Proposal; Comparison of Saudi Aramco with Industry averages as well as Gulf

Region averages; Assess Market Conditions Impact on Projects; Descriptions of comparable baseline projects in the consultant's

database; Benchmarking reports need to share a common format to ensure

consistency of presentation; Items unique to Saudi Aramco should be identified and excluded

from the project benchmarking.

PS&CD/PCED will share the draft report with SAPMT, evaluate its implications for the project and discuss and agree with SAPMT any comments and/or measures necessary to implement the consultant's recommendations. PS&CD/PCED will respond to the Benchmarking Consultant who will then issue the final agreed report.

4.2.7 Completion of the Study

Upon completion of the study and agreement, a plan will be developed to implement any recommendations that may be accepted.

4.2.8 Incorporation into PMIS

Outcomes of benchmarking studies shall be in the format required by Saudi Aramco and continuously reviewed with a view to updating and refining benchmarks and incorporation into Project Management Information System (PMIS) in SAP as modules are developed.

5 Data Collection

PS&CD/PC&ED will be the main contact and coordinator for collecting the data to perform the benchmarking for all projects. The data collected for each phase needs to be tailored to the phase at which the benchmarking is done. Thus, the questionnaire provided by the benchmarking consultant needs to be specific to the phase at which the project is benchmarked. Attached to this guideline are the templates detailing all the Saudi Aramco required benchmarks (Cost, Schedule, Safety, Productivity, Value Improving Practices, Others).

It is noted that next revision of the "Kbase" program will generate IPA type reports that can be used by the Benchmarking Consultant for external benchmarking.

Saudi Aramco will provide the following key data at each phase:


Page 11 of 30

5.1 Study Phase: FEL

Copy of the study; Copy of the Master schedule; Estimating data (Study Estimate); Available engineering data; Answers to the consultant benchmarking questionnaire tailored to the Study

Phase.

5.2 DBSP Phase: FEL 2

Copy of draft DBSP; Milestone Schedule; Estimating data (Budget Estimate); Available engineering data; Answers to the prospective consultant benchmarking questionnaire.

5.3 Project Proposal Phase: FEL 3

Copy of project Proposal/Final DBSP; Level III Schedule; Estimating data (ER Estimate); Proposal contractor data; Answers to the consultant prospective benchmarking questionnaire.

5.4 Close out Phase

Copy of close-out report; Detailed CPM Schedule; Estimating data (As-built Estimate); Available engineering/construction data; Answers to the consultant prospective benchmarking questionnaire.

6 Reporting and Analysis

The Benchmarking Report should be organized according to the WBS set by Saudi Aramco in the methodology section of this procedure. Furthermore the report must contain all the metrics and analysis set forth in the results and outcome sections of this report.

All benchmarking requests and draft/ final reports should review Saudi Aramco's deliverables vs. the industry during all the benchmarking phases, study, DBSP, project proposal and execution.


Page 12 of 30

6.1 Preface

6.2 Executive Summary

Project Benchmarks; Other Project Issues; Conclusions; Recommendations.

6.3 Introduction

Project Background; Scope of Work and Project Technology, Assessment of scope clarity; Retrospective evaluation of completeness and quality of data available at

preceding project phases (FEL-1, 2, 3) if any; Other Project Issues including Contracting Strategy; Description of Benchmark Projects and basis for their selection as

benchmarks.

6.4 Project Drivers

Front End Loading; Value Improving Practices; Project Management Practices; Contracting Strategies; Team Development Index; Estimating / Planning for Control; Execution Strategy; Market Conditions Impact; Quantities.

6.5 Project Outcomes

6.5.1 COST

Contingency Allocation/Use; Cost Performance; Cost Capacity Model Results; Cost Effectiveness; Location Factors including Construction Productivity; Cost Growth/Predictability.


Page 13 of 30

6.5.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE

Cycle Time; Execution Schedule; Construction Schedule; Start-up duration; Safety Performance.

6.5.3 OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE

Impact of Major Late Design Changes; Turnover of Key Personnel; Stage Gate Effectiveness; Achieved Internal Rate of Return.

6.6 Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions Recommendations

6.7 Appendix A: Basis for Analysis and Location Adjustments.

6.8 Appendix B: Current Estimate of Cost.

6.9 Appendix C: Location Adjustment.

6.10 Appendix D: Current Estimated Schedule.

7 Exhibits

Exhibit I Readiness Form

Exhibit II Guideline for initiating a Service Order

Exhibit III Summary of Project Types/Subtypes

Exhibit IV Sample of Benchmarking Model for Crude Production Facility (GOSP)

Exhibit V Sample of Benchmarking Report for Crude Production Facility (GOSP) Revision Summary 22 April 2007 New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.


Page 14 of 30

Exhibit I READINESS FORM

BENCHMARKING READINESS QUESTIONAIRE

Project :

Description :

Your project will be performing a benchmarking analysis with IPA. To ensure the appropriate information will be available for the analysis and make certain IPA's benchmarking effort depicts an accurate assessment of the Project, we are requesting you complete the following questionnaire.

Based on your responses we will recommend an appropriate date for the study and data collection meeting.

GENERAL ENGINEERING

1. Is the project planning to perform soil and hydrology analysis?

Yes No Not required

If Yes, indicate the date when the soil and hydrology analysis planned effort will be/was completed for the Project. _____________

2. Have all engineering studies been completed and results reflected in the project scope and appropriate drawings? Yes No

If No, please list the remaining studies that impact project scope, cost or schedule and note the planned completion date for each study.

______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Are there any outstanding issues affecting the project scope, cost or schedule which are anticipated to be performed after ERA? Yes No

If Yes, please include brief comments on the issue(s).

3. Indicate the date when the project proposal design drawings will be finalized and received approval by the Proponent, Maintenance and other Stakeholder


Page 15 of 30

personnel as appropriate? (Note this does not mean he has to sign all the drawings rather he is in agreement with the project proposal design effort).

Plot Plan ______________ PFDs ______________ P&IDs ______________ Material specifications ______________ Electrical one-line drawings ______________ Major equipment specifications ______________

4. Will Proponent be in a position, at the benchmarking data collection meeting, to indicate he agrees with the final scope? Yes No

If not what will be the outstanding issues and when will this agreement be made?

ESTIMATE & SCOPE

Indicate the date when the ER estimate will be available to transmit to ESD. _________

VIPs

1. Based on the attached list indicate the Value Improvement Practices (VIP) the PMT are planning to implement during the Project Proposal effort.

______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________

2. Indicate the date when all VIP, the project intends to implement, will be complete _________.

PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN

Indicate the date when the Project Execution Plan incorporating all Project Proposal activities, will be completed, approved and can be transmitted to IPA for the benchmarking analysis _____________.

COST CONTROL AND SCHEDULE

1. Does the Saudi Aramco format of the ER estimate easily translate to a system of progress measurement and control of cost to Saudi Aramco Cost Codes?

Yes No


Page 16 of 30

2. Will a cost engineer / business administrator be assigned to the project? Yes No

If Yes, when will he be assigned? _____________.

3. Will a scheduler be assigned to the project? Yes No

If Yes, when will he be assigned? _____________.

4. When will the Cost and Schedule control plans be established and approved and ready for review by IPA? ____________.

5. Indicate the date when a level III schedule which represents an integrated logic based CPM network diagram schedule derived from a critical path analysis incorporating key equipment delivery and milestone dates be available for transmittal to IPA for the benchmarking analysis. ___________.

6. Will the schedule be resource loaded? Yes No

To receive the optimum results from the benchmarking analysis, it is important that the information requested above is complete and available at the time of the data collection meeting. For the data collection meeting, IPA will require the following documents:

Completion of their data collection book they will transmit to the PMT prior to the meeting.

Brief of the Project scope Copies of back-up information concerning VIP analysis performed Electronic copy of the Level III schedule Estimate details based on attached format If this information is not available, IPA's analysis will indicate the project has not reached readiness and although the Project Team is intending to perform these activities prior to ERA, Management will see poorer results.


Page 17 of 30

Exhibit II GUIDELINES FOR INITIATING A

BENCHMARKING SERVICE ORDER WITH ASC

CONTENT: The following guideline should be utilized to initiate a benchmarking service order against ASC contract # 710920/00 with IPA.

INITIATING A PROJECT FOR BENCHMARK ANALYSIS

To add a project to the process for benchmarking, the following items are first transmitted to ASC.

1. BI number and name of project. 2. Budget Item scope of work (BISI or equivalent). 3. Benchmark services start date. 4. PS&CD/PCED contact name (and alternate)/mailing address/phone/fax. 5. Project specific requirements (e.g. benchmark completion date, etc.). 6. Target date for interview with project team.

REQUEST FOR SERVICE

1. After the above information is transmitted to ASC, ASC will transmit the information along with a request for quote to IPA.

2. IPA returns with proposal, fee requirements and milestone dates to ASC & PS&CD/PCED. IPA milestone dates would include:

Distribution of IPA's benchmarking workbook Required receipt date from SAPMT of the workbook Proposed interview date(s) and location Distribution of the draft and final benchmarking report

3. PS&CD/PCED approves the IPA scope and fee and informs ASC to process the Service Order.

4. ASC prepares and sends Service Order to IPA.

5. IPA signs and returns the Service Order to ASC.


Page 18 of 30

CONTACTS

ASC - Primary Contact:

Name: Pamela A. Hurst E-Mail: [email protected] Address: Aramco Services Company

9009 West Loop South M.S. 1093/Rm. 10140 Houston, Texas 77096 Phone: +1-713-432-8488 Fax: +1-713-432-8636

ASC Alternate Contact:

Name: E-Mail: Address: Aramco Services Company

9009 West Loop South M.S. 1093/Rm. 10147 Houston, Texas 77096 Phone: +1-713-432-4577 Fax: +1-713-432-4041

In case of difficulty in contacting ASC, please contact PS&CD

PS&CD - Primary Contact: Name: Fred. M. Rahbar E-Mail: [email protected] Phone: +966-3-874-5011 Fax: +966-3-873-7828


Page 19 of 30

Exhibit III SUMMARY OF PROJECT TYPES

1 Crude Production Facility 2 Gas Plant 3 Sulfur Recovery Unit 4 FCCU 5 VGO Hydrotreater 6 Naphtha Hydrotreater 7 Kerosene Hydrotreater 8 Diesel Hydrotreater 9 CCR Platformer 10 Isomerization Unit 11 Bulk Plants 12 Cross Country Pipelines (Gas) 13 Cross Country Pipelines (Oil) 14 Cross Country Pipelines (Water) 15 Flowlines & Trunklines (Gas) 16 Flowlines & Trunklines (Oil) 17 Flowlines & Trunklines (Water) 18 Process Automation 19 Substation 20 Cogeneration 21 3 Leg Wellhead Jacket 22 4 Leg Wellhead Jacket 23 6 Leg Wellhead Jacket 24 8 Leg Wellhead Jacket 25 Non Esp Wellhead Deck 26 Esp Wellhead Deck 27 Offshore Trunklines 28 Offshore Flowlines 29 Subsea Cables 30 Non Industrial Buildings 31 Industrial Buildings 32 Access Roads 33 Ssd Fencing 34 Security Gates 35 Water Treatment Plants


Page 20 of 30

Exhibit IV SAMPLE BENCHMARKING MODEL FOR CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP)

BUDGET ITEM (BI) : ERA :

JOB ORDER (JO) : ERC :

DESCRIPTION :

AREA NAME PARAMETER UOM QUANTITY COST UNIT COST

QUANTITY OF SCRAPER TRAPS EACH $ $

QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP A EACH

QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP B EACH

QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP C EACH

INLET FACILITY

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (INLET FACILITY) DOLLARS $ $

UNIT CAPACITY MBD $ $

NUMBER OF HIGH PRESSURE TRAPS EACH NUMBER OF INTERMEDIATE PRESSURE TRAPS EACH

NUMBER OF LOW PRESSURE TRAPS EACH

WATER CUT % VOL

GAS OIL RATIO

CRUDE TYPE (AL/AM/AXL/ASL) or API

PRODUCTION TRAP

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PRODUCTION TRAP) DOLLARS $ $

UNIT CAPACITY MMSCFD $ $

HP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY EACH

HP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT) EACH

IP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY EACH

IP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT) EACH

LP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY EACH

LP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT) EACH

HP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP HP

IP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP HP

LP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP HP

GAS GATHERING

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (GAS GATHERING) DOLLARS $ $


Page 21 of 30

NUMBER DESALTING STAGES EACH

UNIT CAPACITY MBD $ $ WET CRUDE HANDLING &

WOSEP TOTAL INSTALLED COST (WET CRUDE HANDLING & WOSEP) DOLLARS $ $

UNIT CAPACITY MBD $ $ CONDENSATE STABILIZATION TOTAL INSTALLED COST (CONDENSATE

STABILIZATION) DOLLARS $ $

CRUDE

STABILIZATION UNIT CAPACITY MBD $ $

UNIT CAPACITY MBD $ $

QUANTITY OF PUMPS EACH

PUMPS TOTAL HP HP

PUMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT) EACH

WATER INJECTION FACILITY

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (WATER INJECTION FACILITY) DOLLARS $ $

COGENERATION

FACILITY ISO RATING MW $ $

TONNAGE STEEL (PIPERACK) TONS $ $

TONNAGE PIPE TONS $ $

WIDTH OF PIPERACK LM

LENGTH OF PIPERACK LM

HEIGHT PIPERACK LM

LEVELS OF PIPERACK EACH

TOTAL LENGTH OF ALL PIPES LM

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PIPERACK) DOLLARS $ $

PIPERACK & PIPING

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PIPING) DOLLARS $ $

SITE PREPARATION SM $ $

CONCRETE CM $ $

STRUCTURAL STEEL TONS $ $

FENCING LM $ $

CONTROL BUILDINGS (ALL BLDGS) SM $ $

PIBS (ALL BLDGS) SM $ $

OTHER TYPES OF BUILDING SM $ $

SUBSTATION SM $ $ TOTAL INSTALLED COST (SUPPORT BLDGS ONLY) DOLLARS $ $

SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (INFRASTRUCTURE) DOLLARS $ $


Page 22 of 30

BOILER QTY EACH $ $

BOILER CAPACITY LBS/HR

BOILER PRESSURE PSIG

COOLING TOWER CAPACITY GPM $ $

AIR COMPRESSOR QTY EACH $ $

AIR COMPRESSOR CAPACITY SCFM

FLARE SIZE SCFM $ $

FIREWATER SYS CAPACITY GPM $ $

NITROGEN GEN SYS CAPACITY SCFM $ $

WATER TREATMENT FACILITY GPM $ $

OFFSITES & UTILITIES

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (OFFSITES & UTILITIES) DOLLARS $ $

TRANSMISSION LINE LENGTH KM $ $

TRANSMISSION LINE VOLTAGE KV

SWITCHYARD VOLTAGE KV $ $

MAIN SUBSTATION EACH $ $

MAIN SUBSTATION KVA $ $

UNIT SUBSTATION EACH $ $

UNIT SUBSTATION KVA $ $

ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY LM $ $

ELECTRICAL CABLE LM $ $

ELECTRICAL

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (ELECTRICAL) DOLLARS $ $

DIGITAL CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS) I/O $ $

EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN SYSTEM (ESD) I/O $ $

VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) I/O $ $

WORKSTATIONS QTY EACH $ $

NEW TRANSMITTERS QTY EACH $ $

INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TRAY LM $ $

INSTRUMENTATION CABLE LM $ $

PROCESS CONTROLS

TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PROCESS CONTROLS) DOLLARS $ $

FIBER OPTIC CABLES LM $ $

COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT EACH $ $ COMMUNICATIONS TOTAL INSTALLED COST (COMMUNICATIONS) DOLLARS $ $


Page 23 of 30

OTHERS LIST MISCELLANEOUS FACILITIES EACH $ $

ENGINEERING (PROJECT PROPOSAL) MHRS $ $

ENGINEERING (DETAIL DESIGN) MHRS $ $

ENGINEERING (PMT SUPPORT) MHRS $ $ ENGINEERING

TOTAL COST (ENGINEERING) DOLLARS $ $

DIRECT CONSTRUCTION MHRS $ $

INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION MHRS $ $

CONSTRUCTION (PMT SUPPORT) MHRS $ $ CONSTRUCTION

TOTAL COST (CONSTRUCTION) DOLLARS $ $

CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP) MBD $ $

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION IN MONTH(S)

PROJECT PROPOSAL (PP) DURATION

PROJECT PROPOSAL (PP) TO ERA DURATION

DETAIL DESIGN DURATION

ERA-MCC DURATION

CONSTRUCTION DURATION

START-UP & COMMISSIONING DURATION

SCHEDULING

MATERIAL & EQUIPMENT WITH MORE THAN 6 MONTHS LEAD-TIME DELIVERY

VALUE PRACTICES LIST OF VALUE PRACTICES IMPLEMENTED

CONTRACTING STRATEGY

TYPE OF CONTRACT TO BE EXECUTED (LSTK, OPENBOOK, LSPB, LSCR, etc.)


Page 24 of 30

Exhibit V SAMPLE BENCHMARKING REPORT FOR CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP)

Unit Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions

Description Unit of Measure Saudi Aramco Cost $

Middle East Region Average Cost $

Middle East Region Lowest Cost $

Middle East Region Highest Cost $

Number of Projects in Region Database

Overall Facility Cost $ per Barrel Inside Battery Limit ISBL $ per Barrel Outside Battery Limit OSBL $ per Barrel Infrastructure $ per Barrel Inlet Fcility $ per Barrel Production Traps $ per Barrel Gas Gathering $per MMSCFD Wet Crude Handling $ per Barrel Condensate Stabilization $ per Barrel Crude Stabilization $ per Barrel Water Injection Facility $ per Barrel Cogeneration Facility $ per MW Electrical Power $ per MW Process Control $per I/O Unit Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions

Description Unit of Measure Saudi Aracmo Cost $

Worldwide Regions Average Cost $

Worldwide Regions Lowest Cost $

Worldwide Regions Highest Cost $

Number of Projects in Worldwide Database

Overall Facility Cost $ per Barrel Inside Battery Limit ISBL $ per Barrel Outside Battery Limit OSBL $ per Barrel Infrastructure $ per Barrel Inlet Facility $ per Barrel Production Traps $ per Barrel Gas Gathering $per MMSCFD Wet Crude Handling $ per Barrel Condensate Stabilization $ per Barrel Crude Stabilization $ per Barrel


Page 25 of 30

Water Injection Facility $ per Barrel Cogeneration Facility $ per MW Electrical Power $ per MW Process Control $per I/O Ratio Cost Analysis Comparison with Middle East Region

Description Unit of Measure Saudi Aracmo Ratio

Middle East Region Average Ratio

Middle East Region Lowest Ratio

Middle East Region Highest Ratio

Number of Projects in Database

Basic Engineering Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Detailed Engineering Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Material Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Direct Construction Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Indirect Construction Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Inlet Facility Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Production Traps Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Gas Gathering Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Wet Crude Handling Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Condensate Stabilization Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Crude Stabilization Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Water Injection Facility Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Cogeneration Facility Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Saudi Aramco Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions

Description Unit of Measure Saudi Aracmo Quantity

Worldwide Regions Average Ratio

Worldwide Regions Lowest Ratio

Worldwide Regions Highest Ratio


Basic Engineering Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Detailed Engineering Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Material Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Direct Construction Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Indirect Construction Ratio to Total Installed Cost


Page 26 of 30

Inlet Facility Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Production Traps Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Gas Gathering Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Wet Crude Handling Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Condensate Stabilization Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Crude Stabilization Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Water Injection Facility Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Cogeneration Facility Ratio to Total Installed Cost

Total Saudi Aramco Ratio to Total Installed Cost Quantity Metrics Comparison with Middle East Region

Description Unit of Measure Saudi Aracmo Quantity

Middle East Region Average Quantity

Middle East Region Lowest Quantity

Middle East Region Highest Quantity


Total Number of Process Equipment Each Total Piping Length Meters Total Piping Weight Tons Total Structural Steel Weight Tons Total Plot Area Square Meters Total Paving Area Square Meters Total Electrical Cable Length Meters Total Instrumentation Cable Length Meters Total Cable Tray Length Meters Total Volume of Concrete Cubic Meters Total DCS, VMS & ESD I/O Points Each Electrical Power Demand KW Total Engineering Manhours Each Total Direct Construction Manhours Each Total Indirect Construction Manhours Each


Page 27 of 30

Quantity Metrics Comparison with Worldwide Regions

Description Unit of Measure Saudi Aracmo Qunatity

Worldwide Regions Average Quantity

Worldwide Regions Lowest Quantity

Worldwide Regions Highest Quantity


Total Number of Process Equipment Each Total Piping Length Meters Total Piping Weight Tons Total Structural Steel Weight Tons Total Plot Area Square Meters Total Paving Area Square Meters Total Electrical Cable Length Meters Total Instrumentation Cable Length Meters Total Cable Tray Length Meters Total Volume of Concrete Cubic Meters Total DCS, VMS & ESD I/O Points Each Electrical Power Demand KW Total Engineering Manhours Each Total Direct Construction Manhours Each Total Indirect Construction Manhours Each


Page 28 of 30

Review Phase & Required Benchmarking Metric Matrix

Stud

y F

EL-1

DB

SP F

EL-2

PP

F

EL-3

Proj

ect C

lose

O

utSa

udi A

ram

co

Ara

bian

Gul

f Reg

ion

Indu

stry

Ave

rage

SCHEDULE Feed Duration/Total Direct Construction Manhours * * * * * * * Execution Duration/Capacity * * * * * * * Overall Duration/Capacity * * * * * * * FEED Duration/Overall Duration * * * * * * * Detailed Eng. Duration/Overall Duration * * * * * * * Construction Duration/Overall Duration * * * * * * * Shutdown Duration * * * * * * PRODUCTIVITY Direct Detailed Engr. Manhours / Quantity (by discipline) * * * *

Direct Const. Manhours/Quantity (by discipline) * * * * Direct Eng Rework Manhours/Total Direct Eng Manhours * * * *

Direct Consat. Rework Manhours/Total Direct Constr. Manhours * * * *

Total FEED Eng Manhours/Capacity * * * * * Total FEED PMT Manhours/Capacity * * * * * Total PMT Manhours/TIC * * * * Detailed Engr Manhours/TIC * * * * Total Direct Const Manhours/TIC * * * * Process Eng Manhours * * * * PMT Manhours/Eng Manhours * * * *


Page 29 of 30

Stud

y F

EL-1

DB

SP F

EL-2

PP

F

EL-3

Proj

ect C

lose

O

utSa

udi A

ram

co

Ara

bian

Gul

f Reg

ion

Indu

stry

Ave

rage

SAFETY Total Recordable Incident Rate * * * * Dart Rate * * * * OTHER Complexity * * * * * * * Facility Location * * * * * * * Contract Strategy for FEED * * * * * * Contract Strategy for EPC * * * * * Project Team Size * * * * * Owner Team Size (FTE) and Composition * * * * * PMT Turnover * * * * * Equipment Count/Capacity * * * * * * * Construction Quantity/Capacity * * * * * Plot Area/Capacity * * * * * * * Avg. Constr. Craft Hours/Week * * * *


Page 30 of 30

Stud

y F

EL-1

DB

SP F

EL-2

PP

F

EL-3

Proj

ect C

lose

O

utSa

udi A

ram

co

Ara

bian

Gul

f Reg

ion

Indu

stry

Ave

rage

PROCESS TYPE PARAMETERS Hydrotreaters * * * * * * * Recycle Rate * * * * * * * Design Pressure * * * * * * * ppm Sulfur Product * * * * * * * ppm Sulfur Feed * * * * * * * ppm Nitrogen product * * * * * * * ppm Nitrogen feed * * * * * * * Hydrogen consumption * * * * * * * # of Reactors * * * * * * *