ADM Erith Decanter project & ADM Liverpool plant Installation

The Challenge

To complete the removal of the existing equipment, undertake structural modifications to the building and install the replacement equipment in a 30-day site shutdown period. The site shutdown period for this project was to commence on 27 December with the only agreed project days when the site would be closed being New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day. Although the areas where the project works would be undertaken would not be operational, other areas of the site remained operational. 

The Solution

The project evaluation identified the following areas of focus: full understanding of the project objectives, communication with the client’s operational team, project works that could be undertaken prior to the shutdown period, project works during the shutdown period; a programme that could monitor daily progress and provide easy evaluation of solutions to recover any delay encountered, a risks register that allowed contingency plans to be in place should any risk be realised and finally, to develop a project team with a mindset to succeed.

Project Objectives - Regular meetings with the project team allowed all parties to interact so that a thorough understanding of the requirements of all parties involved could be fully coordinated. As the supplier of the equipment was from oversees, this proved to be beneficial. 

Project Risks - Through the project objective discussions, a risk register was developed with solutions developed to address the risks. Where the risk was considered high, it was decided to prepare the site to implement the solution. For example, additional resources, 24-hour working, back up equipment, delivery of equipment and drawings.

Communication - GGP was site based four weeks before the shutdown period. This assisted with the development of the understanding of the client’s site decommissioning and recommissioning protocol. It allowed the site to become familiar with the health and safety requirements of the project under the CDM Regulations. 

Project programme - A day-by-day programme was developed to assess project progress. The programme could be manipulated to model potential solutions to access the effectiveness of the proposal. Daily meetings were held with the project team to agree progress and discuss any rectification solutions considered necessary.

Project works that could be completed prior to the site shutdown period - Any project work that could be implemented prior to the site shutdown were implemented and coordinated with the site through daily shutdown periods. This also gave the project team the opportunity to review the effectiveness of the project controls especially with health and safety.

Shutdown period – The project controls during this period were also focussed on health and safety. There were 50 men on site between five contractors and over three floor levels within an operational site. The proactive approach with the project team allowed daily installation risks assessments and method statements to be thoroughly discussed and amended without delay.

The Result

The project was completed in 27 days which was 3 days ahead of schedule and without any recorded accidents.