Project Management Approach to Commissioning

 Schedule Management
 Cost Management
 Communication and Stakeholder Management
 Risk Management
 Scope Management
 Resource Management
 Procurement Management
 Integration Management

There is more to commissioning and startup of an industrial plant than the detailed testing of
each piece of equipment. An entire commissioning program requires a project management
approach to properly plan and execute all stages of commissioning. Commissioning is a critical
stage of the project lifecycle. But when you review common project literature, commissioning is
not covered in depth. This may be one of the reasons why commissioning is often an
afterthought on many projects – the commissioning team is only engaged at the end of the
project to try to make the equipment work. But doing this will not deliver the project on-time or
on-budget. Commissioning needs to be integrated into all stages of the project with a project
management approach to ensure that each step of detailed testing is successful.

1|Page
 1- Schedule Management

The project schedule is the commissioning team’s most powerful tool to define priorities and
explain the impacts of delays to the rest of the project team. The most important milestone on
the project is the in-service date, and it is the commissioning team’s responsibility to meet this
date at the end of the project. This is only possible though if all other groups that precede
commissioning deliver their portion of the project when needed to support the commissioning
sequence. Delays during the design phase can have follow-on impacts to construction and
commissioning. Installation and mechanical completions that are out of sequence or delayed
will significantly impact system commissioning. There are a significant number of small details
and deliverables needed at the right time in order that all parts of the project are available when
needed to bring the new facilities online.
The commissioning schedule needs to be developed early in the project in order to convey
priorities to the project team. If the commissioning schedule is not developed until later in the
project when the commissioning team mobilizes to the site, the sequence of activities during
design, procurement, IFAT, and construction can be completely misaligned. Without an
understanding of how the project must come together at the end to meet the in-service date, it is
not possible to plan all preceding activities to ensure this is the case.
This is one of the main reasons to have the commissioning team involved at the beginning of
the project during Front End Engineering & Design (FEED). The commissioning team can work
with the design team to establish the overall commissioning sequence to meet the project in-
service date. This in turn provides guidance to the design team for when design deliverables
need to be available to support subsequent construction and commissioning activities.
Once developed, it is important for the commissioning team to continually evaluate the
commissioning schedule and assess the impacts of any changes. Despite everyone’s best
intentions, there will still be delays that occur. Some of these delays are within the project
team’s ability to control, while others are more difficult to manage due to external factors.
 Delay of design deliverables.
 Equipment deliveries may be late arriving at the site due to vendor-caused delays.
 Equipment may be damaged during shipping or installation.
 Systems may fail during testing due to infant mortality.
 Systems may be damaged during testing due to incorrect test methods.
 Plus, many more.

While these delays may occur, most have some method to mitigate their chance of occurrence,
and all should have a contingency plan should they occur. More on this later when risk
management is discussed.
During commissioning, it is important for the commissioning team to assess the schedule and
provide regular updates to all stakeholders. Everyone will have a keen interest in how
commissioning is progressing, and the correct level of schedule information needs to be
conveyed to others so they have a clear understanding of the status of commissioning.

2|Page
 2- Cost Management
The cost of commissioning is not a significant part of the project budget. Commissioning costs
are typically less than 5% of the overall project budget, in the range of 2% to 3%. But the cost
of delays during commissioning is massive. This is why the commissioning phase of your
project needs to be planned to precision.
The construction phase of the project is where the largest portion of the budget is spent. There
are large workforces involved, equipment deliveries arrive at the site during construction, and
construction activities can take place over many years. For this reason, the construction phase
of the project gets lots of attention. The owner is paying large progress payments each month,
and this certainly gets everyone’s attention. But the cost cannot be the only metric measured
during construction. The schedule needs to be monitored as well since delays during
construction can have huge cost impacts during commissioning.
Commissioning costs consist of the following:
 Labor costs for the workforce involved in commissioning. This team is much smaller than the
construction labor force and not a significant portion of the overall project budget.
 Equipment costs for specialized test equipment. Some of this test equipment can have a long
lead time with high procurement costs. But commissioning equipment costs are not a significant
cost of the overall project budget.
 Material costs for first-fills or incidental costs to start equipment for the first time. Again, this is
not a significant cost of the overall project budget.

The cost of commissioning is not a significant portion of the project budget.

However, the cost of delays during commissioning is massive due to the lost opportunity cost
and the project burn rate.
The lost opportunity cost is the value to the owner of one day of commercial service of the new
facilities. If the owner is able to generate $1M dollars during each day that the plant is in-
service, then one day delay to the project in-service date costs the owner the opportunity to
generate this one day of revenue. If the project is delayed for several days, weeks, or months,
these lost opportunity costs can become quite significant. To hold the contractor accountable
for these delays, liquidated damages are often included in contracts to ensure all parties are
motivated to meet the in-service date.
The project burn rate is the cost of one day of the project to the owner. At the beginning of the
project, the burn rate starts out low. There are only a few people working on the project as it
gets started and resources are ramped up. As more resources are added to the project and
equipment is purchased, the project burn rate starts to increase quickly. The owner is paying
monthly progress payments to all groups involved in the project, and these monthly payments
are increasing as more resources and material is invoiced each month. In addition, the owner is
incurring interest and escalation costs on top of the capital being spent to pay for the
project. The project burn rate is at its highest level at the end of the construction phase as
commissioning activities are starting. On a large project, the daily burn rate could be many
millions of dollars. I have worked on projects where the daily burn rate was over $5M
dollars. This means that each day of the project is costing the owner $5M in labour, material,
interest, and escalation charges.
Each day of the project during commissioning is extremely valuable and this must be
considered when making decisions on the project. It is not appropriate to try to save $1000 if

3|Page
that will cause a one-day delay to the project. The thought process needs to be that if the
project in-service date can be advanced by one day, this will save the project $5M.
The project burns rate and lost opportunity costs make each day of commissioning very
valuable. And this needs to be considered early in the project as well. If a design decision can
be made that will save one or more days of commissioning, then it is in the project’s best
interest to proceed with the design in this manner. If installation activities are not completed
when needed by the commissioning team, this will cause delays to the in-service date at a cost
of the daily burn rate.
For these reasons, commissioning needs to be planned in advance of on-site testing so that the
commissioning team is ready to perform testing activities. All risks need to be mitigated in
advance (more on this later) so that the chance of delay during commissioning is low. Having a
highly-skilled commissioning team will help mitigate delays as they will know what to look for in
advance of testing and can react to issues as they occur promptly and efficiently. If the
commissioning team stumbles during on-site testing or is performing testing that is not
absolutely necessary, each added day is an additional expense to the project. The mindset
needs to be that each day of testing costs $5M dollars, only the required testing needs to be
performed, and any failed or repeated tests come at a significant cost. Having said this, all
testing must be completed to ensure that the systems are contract compliant and the owner is
receiving a quality product.
While the cost of commissioning is low, the cost of delays during commissioning is
astronomical. All activities that precede commissioning and tests that take place during
commissioning need to this keep in mind when being planned and executed. A poorly planned
and executed commissioning phase of your project can quickly cause the project costs to grow
out of control.

4|Page
 3- Communication and Stakeholder Management
Scrutiny of the project is at its peak during the commissioning phase. All project stakeholders
can see that the end of the project is getting close and want the new facilities in-service right
away. While design and construction activities may have been allowed to slip in the project
schedule, no project stakeholders will tolerate a slip in the project in-service date.
This doesn’t really seem fair, does it – that design and construction groups were not held
accountable for their schedule delays, but all scrutiny is on the commissioning team to ensure
that commissioning activities are not delayed. But this is the reality on projects, and is why we
are part of the commissioning team – to deliver under pressure!
Just a note – to reduce the level of pressure – re-read the above section of schedule
management. The project schedule is the commissioning team’s best tool to hold previous
groups accountable for their deliverables.
I have included communication management and stakeholder management together as it is
critical for the commissioning team to approach these two project management functions
together. During the commissioning phase, communication management is critical to manage
all stakeholder’s expectations and ensure they are getting the information they need to
understand what is taking place during commissioning. Commissioning activities will go much
better if stakeholders know what to expect during commissioning, what the potential risks are,
how risks will be mitigated, and what contingency plans will be enacted to maintain
commissioning progress. Regular updates to stakeholders will ensure they are aware of how
testing is progressing. Immediate updates when failed tests occur will give stakeholders
comfort that all issues are being disclosed and are open for discussion.
Complete communication management during commissioning builds trust with stakeholders
during this highly scrutinized stage of the project. Without a focus on communication
management, stakeholders can quickly get upset and react in ways that negatively impact the
project. Commissioning is a high-stress environment for everyone involved. There are lots of
cost and schedule pressures at all levels of the organization, and the commissioning process
needs to be allowed to take place thoroughly and properly even when issues are
occurring. Proper communication management gives stakeholders a level and comfort and trust
of the commissioning team that even when issues arise, the team is up to the challenge to
deliver a quality product on-time.

5|Page
 4- Risk Management
Risk management is an important aspect to consider while planning and executing the
commissioning phase of your project. This is more than just preparing a risk register that is
reviewed monthly. Risk management must be part of your daily work routines and decision-
making processes. All decisions on the project must balance scope, schedule, and budget, in
order to ensure that the lowest risk approach is being taken.
A risk register is typically prepared early in the project during the design phase. The risk
register includes all the known risks that can be identified on the project. The risk register is
reviewed monthly and new risks are added, existing risks are evaluated to review the impact
and severity, and risks that are becoming issues are addressed. When this is taking place early
in the project, there may not be a focus on commissioning risks. A monthly review is also not
often enough to consider risks. A monthly review may be appropriate to discuss risks with
project executives, but the project team needs to be continually on a daily/hourly basis
evaluating risks and establishing mitigation strategies. Every decision made must consider the
risk impacts of the potential outcome during commissioning.
Due to the project burn rate, any risks that become issues and cause delays can have huge
cost impacts during commissioning. To deliver the project on-time and on-budget, risks must be
considered in order to evaluate which ones will derail your path to success and what
contingencies need to be planned for should they occur. Contingency plans must be enacted
quickly during commissioning, and these need to be planned for in advance so they can be
quickly implemented if things start going sideways during commissioning.
The best approach is to mitigate risks early in the project. Unfortunately, it is too common to
defer risks to later in the project, which means the poor commissioning team gets all the
problems that weren’t dealt with earlier dumped on them at the end of the project. But this is not
a suitable approach to deliver the project on-time and on-budget. Risks need to be mitigated as
early as possible to avoid costly delays during commissioning.
Automation presents a significant risk to the project if not properly planned for in the project
sequence. There is a multitude of small details that need to be managed for automation
systems to function correctly, and each and every detail needs to be taken care of earlier in the
project so that many small details do not become one giant problem during
commissioning. This is done by establishing a properly conducted IFAT during the procurement
stage of the project. The functionality of the plant process control systems needs to be verified
(both hardware and software) prior to automation cubicles arriving at site. Skipping IFAT and
only verifying the hardware in the factory is an example of deferring risk to later in the
project. Integrating the PLC logic and automation cubicles for the first time on-site is risky if the
code is being designed and integrated for the first time during critical path on-site
commissioning activities. The time for debugging of the code will then need to be allocated
within your commissioning schedule, and there are limited ways to mitigate problems with the
logic design this late in the project. Instead, design deliverables should be planned to be
available prior to IFAT to be tested in the factory and integrated with the hardware cubicles to
reduce the chance of issues during on-site testing. This is one example of mitigating risks
earlier in the project to avoid impacts during commissioning, and each decision made on the
project needs to follow this same thought process.
The commissioning team needs to be involved in the early part of the project to help assess
risks to commissioning and help the project team establish risk mitigation strategies to ensure
commissioning is successful. An end-to-end project through the process to start with the end in
mind will ensure that decisions made through all stages of the project are mitigating risk and
setting the commissioning phase of your project up for the best chance of success.

6|Page
 5- Scope Management
The scope of the project is defined at the beginning of the project. There will invariably be
changes to the scope of work as new challenges are identified. Any changes to scope,
schedule, or budget must go through the contractual change management process.
But the commissioning phase of the project is not the time to implement changes to the
work. There will be some changes that are required to correct issues. But scope creep is a risk
during commissioning and needs to be closely monitored to ensure the work is not delayed.
The commissioning phase may be the first time that on-site operators are seeing the new
systems. There are several people involved and each will have a different opinion or preference
of how the systems should look and feel. However, the commissioning phase is not the time to
make these changes. Only changes to address contractual deficiencies can be implemented,
and even then, the timing of when changes are implemented needs to be evaluated. A number
of small changes can quickly become significant and this scope creep can cause delays to
critical path commissioning activities.
The best way to manage scope creep during commissioning is to get early and often input from
the owner and operators during earlier phases of the project. The perfect time to get
operational input to HMI screens and functionality of the system is during IFAT testing. The
IFAT setup includes all functional HMIs allowing the operators to not only view the screens but
to interact and provide input of the functionality of the screens.
Any opinions or preferences that are suggested as changes during commissioning can certainly
be noted but held onto for review at a later date. These can be evaluated after the project in-
service date to determine if they are justified to be implemented.
Getting input earlier in the project ensures that the project team has a buy-in of the HMI
interfaces and will limit the opinions and preferences during commissioning. The
commissioning team can then focus on testing the systems and placing them in-service to meet
the project ISD.

Commissioning is a specialized quality assurance process for third-party verification of the

design and installation. The commissioning phase confirms that the quality and technical
requirements of the contract are met prior to handover to the owner, and the commissioning
team plays an important role in the project quality processes.
However, the QA/QC process during construction is distinctly separate from the commissioning
process. The two quality processes need to remain separate and be managed by different
groups. This is important in order that a separate group is verifying the design and
installation. It is not appropriate to have the design group manage commissioning or the
construction group manage commissioning, since this would mean that these groups are
overseeing the quality and technical compliance of their own work. This presents a conflict of
interest and must be avoided by having a separate commissioning management process. This
ensures that the owner receives a contract-compliant system.
Construction quality is a key factor determining the success of commissioning. A weak Quality
Management System (QMS) during construction pushes all the installation issues to later in the
project during the commissioning phase. Commissioning instead becomes the quality control
process that did not take place earlier as it should have during construction activities. Instead of
testing the systems to catch minor issues and placing the systems in-service, commissioning
becomes the quality process to identify construction defects, causing many starts and stops to
commissioning and delaying the project ISD.
A strong QMS needs to be implemented during the construction phase. This includes in-field
verification of installed equipment as well as verification of quality paperwork documenting the
construction quality process. In-field inspections and paperwork review are both

7|Page
required. Paperwork verification does not substitute for in-field inspections and vice versa –
both need to be part of a strong QMS. Without a best-in-industry QMS implemented by the
construction team, all the installation issues that should have been identified during construction
inspections are instead deferred to later in the project and discovered during critical path on-site
commissioning activities. Float that exists within the construction schedule can be used to
address installation deficiencies as they are discovered, rather than leaving installation issues to
be discovered during commissioning.
Without a strong QMS implemented by the construction team, all the risk due to incorrectly
installed equipment is deferred to the commissioning phase. When issues are identified, each
will take time to address, causing delays to the project ISD.

6- Resource Management
In advance of the commissioning phase, the Commissioning Manager determines the staffing
requirements in order to execute each phase of commissioning. This is done early in the project
so that staffing estimates can be included in the project budget. It is important to note that there
are specialized skill sets required to fill many of the roles on the commissioning team – these
are not just warm bodies to show up and “figure it out” and they go. Having the right skill sets
on the commissioning team is equally important as having the right number of people. Having
said this, hands-on commissioning experience is an excellent learning opportunity. Senior
commissioning team members are always happy to help and guide more junior members to get
the valuable experience to eventually allow them to become the experienced senior members of
the commissioning team.
As indicated earlier, labor costs for commissioning are not a significant portion of the overall
project budget. Costs do need to be allocated within the project budget to ensure that funds are
available for staffing later in the project. These funds must be protected in order that groups
that precede commissioning do not re-allocate these funds. You wouldn’t think that the project
controls group would allow this to happen, but stranger things have happened on projects when
cost overruns are occurring.
As well, prior to commissioning, specialized test equipment or any other material needs to be
planned for and procured. Some specialized test equipment can have a large cost and long
lead-time, and these procurements need to be planned for in advance.
Some test equipment may be required for the ongoing operation of the plant. It is beneficial to
coordinate with the operation’s requirements for test equipment, since it may be in everyone’s
best interest to advance procurement of operational equipment to be used during
commissioning rather than purchase the same test equipment twice.

8|Page
 7- Procurement Management
Procurement of test equipment that is needed during commissioning is fairly
straightforward. Test equipment that is needed is identified in advance and purchased with
enough lead time to ensure it arrives at the site when needed.
Procurement of the major plant equipment is more critical, and the commissioning team can
help with this.
During the procurement phase of the project, factory test requirements need to be defined within
each procurement contract. Procurement contracts define the technical requirements for each
piece of equipment as well as define the testing to be completed in the factory prior to the
equipment being shipped to site. For complex equipment such as automation cubicles, IFAT
requirements can be quite involved, and the detailed requirements for this testing needs to be
defined in advance of awarding contracts to vendors. That way the equipment manufacturer
knows the level of testing that is required and can allocate time within their delivery schedule to
properly test the equipment. Based on this information, you can then ensure that realistic
procurement timelines (including IFAT) are included within the project schedule.
Unfortunately, IFAT is often skipped and only the hardware is verified in the factory, leaving the
software to be verified at a later time. The delivery of equipment becomes delayed for whatever
reason and the project team feels it is more important to get the cubicles shipped to site for
installation. This is a short-sighted goal, as all the design and installation issues related to the
integration of the software and hardware are deferred to site. Any issues that would have been
identified during IFAT now must be discovered during critical path on-site commissioning
activities. Despite the pressure to ship the equipment to site, a proper IFAT must be
conducted. Any schedule savings that may be perceived to exist by shipping the cubicles
earlier are always lost with even more delays incurred while troubleshooting the equipment on-
site. The project ends up being delayed even further, with the poor commissioning team trying
to address all the issues that were not caught during IFAT.

9|Page
 8- Integration Management
Integration management is an important aspect of a project, especially as it relates to
commissioning. But the project management literature does not cover this topic properly.
Integration management is explained as setting up the project including project charters, project
plan, project schedule, etc. These are important aspects of the project, but what about the
practical integration management to ensure all aspects of the project are available when needed
to support the project commissioning schedule? Because only the front-end activities of
integration management are covered, this is likely why commissioning is often overlooked and
not given the focused attention it requires to make this important phase of the project
successful. The approach seems to be that if there is a charter, plan, and schedule prepared at
the beginning of the project, everything will go per plan. And we know this is never the case –
things change, new information is discovered, issues are encountered, and equipment failures
happen. How do we flip the discussion so that integration management as it relates to
commissioning is equally as important?
A strong project manager will know that the project initiation process to establish scope,
schedule, and budget are only the first steps – equally as important is the execution of the plan
to keep the project within the scope, schedule, and budget constraints. It is the project
managers role to ensure that design managers, construction managers, and project controls
managers are keeping all aspects of the project in line with the plan to ensure the
commissioning team has all the parts of the project when needed to fully integrate the project. If
this is not the case and parts of the project scope or schedule become misaligned, the
commissioning team will not be able to integrate the project successfully. For example, the
electrical distribution system is required prior to testing the HVAC systems, since power is
required to test the air handling units and HVAC controls. The commissioning sequence will
define when the power distribution system is required in relation to when the HVAC system is
required. All project participants must be working to the same project sequence. However, if
the power distribution system design package is late, causing the electrical installation to be
late, there is no way for the commissioning team to proceed with testing the HVAC system while
still waiting for the electrical distribution system. The integration of the project must be
managed right from the start to align with the project commissioning sequence to meet the ISD.
This is too often overlooked. The project is too siloed, where the electrical team installing the
power system is working independently from the mechanical team installing the HVAC
system. The project manager must ensure that all disciplines are aligned in order for the project
to be integrated successfully by the commissioning team in the end. And the commissioning
manager can help the project manager and project team understand the sequence and
requirements needed to successfully integrate the project. The earlier in the project this is
completed, the better informed and better prepared the project team will be to meet the required
deadlines and quality requirements.
Unfortunately, established project literature does not cover the integration management and
commissioning process sufficiently. Your project may seem to be progressing satisfactorily –
designs are progressing, and equipment is being installed – until it comes to the commissioning
phase and nothing works. If your project has not been managed with an integrated approach,
all the commissioning team can do at the end of the project is point out issues and incur
schedule delays. I’m not sure why commissioning is not given the focus that it needs in project
literature to make projects successful. I can only guess that is it because:
 The commissioning process is not well understood
 At the beginning of the project, the commissioning process is not perceived to provide value and
is therefore not included in the project plan

10 | P a g e
 Projects over the last few decades have not been as complex, and commissioning was more
likely to be completed much easier
 Project literature is more focused on less complex projects such as building commissioning or
simple standalone projects
Some projects need to learn the value of commissioning the hard way, by approaching
commissioning as an after-thought, and only realizing during or after commissioning that
additional work earlier in the project was required to execute commissioning more efficiently and
generate a more cost-effective end to the project.
Today’s projects are far too complex to leave commissioning as an afterthought. Where past
projects had more standalone systems and less automated controls, today’s projects are far
more integrated and require detailed planning and execution in order to function correctly in the
end. The Integrated Commissioning Method ensures that the commissioning process is part of
all stages of the project and ensures that complex systems can be successfully integrated as
one plant process at the end of the project.

Conclusion
Commissioning is more than just performing tests on the equipment at the end of the
project. For the commissioning phase of your project to be successful, you need to have a
project management approach to commissioning, addressing each of the project management
topics discussed in above. Only with proper project management planning and an approach to
mitigate risk early in the project can you successfully complete your commissioning on-time and
on-budget. Don’t leave commissioning to the end of the project – ensure that you have an
integrated approach to commissioning throughout all phases of your project.

11 | P a g e