L1 CHE PRO 031 Engineering Change Procedure

ENGINEERING CHANGE PROCEDURE
L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016
Approval
Amendment Record
Approval Date Version Description

12/09/2016 1 Supersedes L1-ASY-PRO-001
Approving Manager: Chief Engineer Approval Date: 12/09/2016 Next Review Date: 12/09/2019
PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 1 of 24
Table of Contents
1. Purpose ............................................................................................................ 3
2. Scope ............................................................................................................... 3
3. References and Associated Documents ....................................................... 4
4. Abbreviations and Acronyms ........................................................................ 4
5. Definitions and Responsibilities .................................................................... 5
6. Procedure ........................................................................................................ 7
6.1. Statement of Principles ................................................................................... 9
6.2. Class 1 Engineering Changes ...................................................................... 10
6.3. Class 2 Engineering Changes ...................................................................... 11
6.4. Compiling an Engineering Change ............................................................... 13
6.5. Engineering Change Approval ...................................................................... 21
6.6. Urgent Engineering Change Authorisation .................................................... 21
6.7. Responsibilities............................................................................................. 21
7. Records .......................................................................................................... 23
8. Engineering Change Guidance Notes ......................................................... 23

8.1. Approved Form 1 .......................................................................................... 23
8.2. Register EC .................................................................................................. 23
8.3. Determine Scope and Depth of Risk Assessment: Determine Stakeholders . 23
8.4. Review EC: ................................................................................................... 24
8.5. Obtain Approval and Authorisation. .............................................................. 24
8.6. Implement Change as per EC Document...................................................... 24
Table of Figures
Figure 1 - Process Flow chart ..................................................................................................8
Figure 2 - Class 1 EC flowchart .............................................................................................10
Figure 3 - Class 2 EC flowchart .............................................................................................12
Figure 4 - EC Approval Process ............................................................................................21
1. Purpose
The Metro Trains Melbourne (MTM) Engineering Change (EC) process is the primary
means of implementing engineering configuration control (engineering review and
approval) for all MTM Rolling Stock and Infrastructure assets.
The process relates to identifying changes to one or more of the following aspects:
• Configuration (‘form, fit or function’)
• Maintenance (task/frequency)
It also extends to operational assets that have their interfaces, or relationships to
other operational assets requiring change.
The process defines how MTM initiates, develops and approves engineering
changes. The EC process evaluates the viability of the change from a technical
perspective by all the necessary technical stakeholders with particular regard to
safety.
In particular, the application of this procedure ensures that all MTM Rolling Stock and
Infrastructure configuration, maintenance and technical standard changes are:
• Endorsed by the relevant Head(s) of Engineering (HoE);
• Endorsed by other relevant Stakeholders as identified (e.g. Fleet Managers,
Infrastructure Delivery Managers, Engineering Managers (Major Projects
only);
• Authorised by the Chief Engineer (for Class 1 EC) or appropriate HoE (for
Class 2 EC) before implementation; and
• Risks generated by the change adequately treated (current and proposed).
Note 1: It is imperative to note that the EC process is a SEPARATE but aligned
PROCESS to Management of Change (MoC). The MoC process is governed by
Safety, Environment and Risk (SER).
Note 2: Changes to maintenance tasks that only modify a current task but do not
change the output of that task or impact on the task frequency may not require an EC.
Any change that may fit this category shall be agreed by the ERM and the relevant
HoE and endorsed by the Engineering Review Board (ERB).
2. Scope
This procedure applies to all configuration and maintenance changes made to
MTM Rolling Stock and Infrastructure operational assets (and any MTM Rolling Stock
and Infrastructure maintenance support assets specified by the Engineering Change
Review Manager (ERM)).
Note 3: As efficiency to the EC process, technical standard changes no longer
require an EC. Technical standards are sufficiently reviewed approved prior to
release, additionally technical standards will require approval through the standards
committee.
This procedure is mandatory for any changes that are to be applied by any internal or
external parties to MTM. For clarity, this includes the introduction of any new MTM
Rolling Stock and Infrastructure, and the handing over of any Works from the Projects
Division to MTM.
Note 4: Any new infrastructure equipment being added to MTMs network as part of
an EC shall be type approved in accordance with MTMs ‘Type Approval Procedure’
(L1-CHE-PRO-004).
It is not the scope of this document to outline in detail how the EC form is to be
completed. For direction in completing the EC form refer to ‘Engineering Change
Form User Guide’ (L1-CHE-GDL-031)
3. References and Associated Documents

L1-CHE-GDL-031 Engineering Change Form User Guide
L1-CHE-PRO-004 Type Approval Procedure
L1-PRJ-PRO-002 Gate Procedure for Projects
L1-SQE-PRO-001 Management of Change Process
L0-SQE-PRO-031 Enterprise Risk Management Procedure
L4-CHE-GDL-001 Engineering (Type Approval – Engineering Change – Waiver)
Process Map
L4-SQE-FOR-064 Risk Assessment template
4. Abbreviations and Acronyms

AC Asset Custodian
AEPL Approved Engineering Product List
CC Change Coordinator
CE Chief Engineer
DMS Drawing Management System
EC Engineering Change
ECRO Engineering Change Register Officer
EGI Equipment Group Identifier
ERB Engineering Review Board
ERM EC Review Manager
HoE Head of Engineering
IFC Issued For Construction
ISR Interim Staging Request
MoC Management of Change
MTM Metro Trains Melbourne Pty. Ltd.
PTV Public Transport Victoria
PWM Passenger Weighted Minutes
RAMS Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety
TA Type Approval
TMP Technical Maintenance Plan
5. Definitions and Responsibilities

Approved The Approved Engineering Product List (AEPL) that lists all equipment,
Engineering components, materials and consumables that have been approved for
Product List use in MTM Infrastructure. The AEPL does not include generally
available items that pose a low risk to MTM Goals and Objectives, and
do not require systematic control.
Asset Custodian The position holder responsible for the overall asset performance of
(AC) MTM Rolling Stock and Infrastructure operational assets and owner of
all the risks associated with these assets. The Asset Custodian is the
General Manager Infrastructure (for Infrastructure) or the General
Manager Rolling Stock (for Rolling Stock only), or their delegated
representative.
Change The position holder responsible for the compilation of the EC document;
Coordinator (CC) obtaining all endorsements, approvals and authorisations; and
overseeing the completion of all implementation tasks. The CC should
have a sufficient level technical knowledge to develop and complete the
EC.
Configuration A change to the form, fit function, geographical location or interface
Change characteristics of an asset or asset system. This also includes the
addition or removal of any assets or asset systems.
Drawing PTV administered central repository for all designs, plans and other
Management pertinent information detailing railway infrastructure owned by the State
System (DMS) of Victoria.
EC Review The engineering manager responsible for providing guidance on the
Manager (ERM) preparation of the EC Document and ensuring completeness and
robustness of the EC Document and where delegated establishment of
the EC workflow.
Engineering A Class 1 EC is one that impacts cost, schedule and/or technical
Change - Class 1 compliance/performance due to one or more of the following factors:
a. To satisfy approved, new or modified operational, functional,
non-functional and/or interface requirements;
b. Changes (including interface characteristics) that affect/alter
form, fit or function;
c. As a result of correcting a design deficiency; or
d. Maintenance (task/frequency). e.g. TMP.
Engineering
A Class 2 EC involves a change that does not alter form/fit/function or is
Change - Class 2 assessed as having low enough risk by the relevant Head(s) of
Engineering (HoE) and the ERM in not warranting a Class 1
categorisation.
Engineering The introduction or modification to the configuration or maintenance

Change (EC) change applied to any MTM Rolling Stock and Infrastructure operational
assets. The definition also extends to any operational assets that have
their interfaces, or relationships to other operational assets changed.
Engineering A SharePoint based electronic form that describes the EC and details
Change (EC) the change risks and implementation tasks. The EC tool also acts as the
Form repository for the EC form and associated attachments such as
drawings, new/amended documents, design reports, test reports, risk
assessment, etc. The form also enables recording of electronic
signatures in the EC approval process. A SharePoint generated e-mail
containing all approval comments is manually attached to the EC as the
approval record.
Engineering The position holder responsible for registering and maintaining all ECs in
Change Register the EC register and performing the initial review of the EC prior to
Officer (ECRO) submission to the ERB.
Engineering The entity established in the MTM Engineering group to provide
Review Board direction in ensuring all the required engineering stake holders are
(ERB) identified for the review of MoC and EC documentation.
Maintenance A change to a maintenance task or frequency impacting the TMP
Change (including service schedule and Maintenance instructions).
Maintenance A physical asset that is utilised in the maintenance of MTM Rolling Stock
Support Asset and Infrastructure operational assets. This includes but not limited to
tools, power equipment, lifting equipment, travelling platforms,
measuring equipment, road vehicles, hi-rails, work trains, maintenance
sidings, maintenance buildings, maintenance software and maintenance
hardware.
Management of The process by which MTM registers and manages all changes through
Change (MoC) MTMs ‘Management of Change Process’ (L1-SQE-PRO-001). The MoC
Process identifies changes (any modification/alteration/addition/removal
of operations, asset infrastructure, rolling stock or process) at a high
level that may affect the safety and/or operations of MTM railway
operations, ensuring:
• Changes and their associated risks are managed so far as is
reasonably practicable;
• Is in compliance with Rail Safety National Law National
Regulations 2012 and MTM’s Rail Transport Operator
obligations;
• Is in compliance with the Rail Infrastructure Manager and Rolling
Stock Operator obligations as set out by the Office of the
National Rail Safety Regulator.
MoC Form 1 Change Impact Assessment Tool ‘Form 1’ as defined in the MoC
Process.
MoC Form 2 Change Impact Assessment Tool ‘Form 2 as defined in the MoC
Process.
Operational A physical asset that is utilised in the delivery of MTM services. This
Asset includes but not limited to trains, stations, mainline tracks, stabling
sidings, signals, level crossings, sub stations, traction supply overhead,
bridges, structures, signal boxes, communication huts, control systems,
communication systems, software and the rail reserve.
Risk The risk that fits into the definition as described by the applicable ‘Risk
Context’. Refer to the ‘Severity’ tab of the ‘Risk Assessment Template’
(L4-SQE-FOR-064).
Note: The EC is primarily interested in Risk that will be present post the
change, e.g. Risks that will only be present during the construction
phase of the risk are considered to be out the scope of the EC process
and shall be captured by the relevant document e.g. Safe Working
Method Statement, and shall be the responsibility of the relevant stake
holder.
6. Procedure
This EC procedure defines both ‘Class 1’ and ‘Class 2’ ECs. The EC process has
been refined to take a more considered approach in developing and approving
changes of varying complexity. For changes that are deemed to be at low enough risk
and have negligible or no impact to Form/Fit/Function may be classed as a ‘Class 2’
EC, which will follow a more streamlined path of the EC process.
In order for a change to be considered as a ‘Class 2’ change, the Change
Coordinator (CC) shall seek acceptance from the ERM and the relevant HoE(s). If
accepted the EC will require ratification at the ERB.
Whereby a change is considered by the CC having very low significance, therefore
not warranting an EC, the CC shall seek acceptance for such a consideration from
the ERM and the relevant HoE(s). If accepted the proposal for no EC will require
confirmation by the ERB. An example for such a change not requiring an EC would
be when a ‘like for like’ item is being replaced. The new item shall assessed to ensure
conformance to the same specification (form, fit and function) as the item it is
replacing e.g. replacing a Company ‘A’ 12 watt bayonet Cap compact fluoro light with
a Company ‘B’ 12 watt bayonet Cap compact fluoro light.
Figure 1 graphically describes the process flow for both ‘Class 1’ and ‘Class 2’ ECs.
The process relating ‘Class 1’ and ‘Class 2’ are defined in greater detail in sections
6.2 and 6.3 respectively.
All ECs are to use the SharePoint based MTM Engineering Change Form; refer to
‘Engineering Change Form User Guide’ (L1-CHE-GDL-031).
Note 5: Any new equipment being added to the MTM rail network as part of an EC
shall require type approval prior to installation in accordance with MTMs Type
Approval Procedure (L1-CHE-PRO-004).
Note 6: The Interim Staging Request (ISR) process provides staged projects with a
mechanism to approve minor works that are not covered within an authorised EC. For
more details regarding ISRs refer to Engineering Change (EC) - Interim Staging
Request (ISR) – (L4-CHE-FOR-047).
Qualified asset
(L1-CHE-PRO-004)
MoC Form 1
or Asset not Register EC
Approved
requiring
qualification
EwB to decide if change is

Class 1, Class 2 or no EC
required?
Is change Class 1,
Class 2 or no EC?
Class 1
## If applicable Project ERB Develop Class 1 EC

process to be followed prior (risk assessment Class 2 No EC required
to completion of the Class 1 required) ##
Engineering Change
Is a Risk
Assessment Yes
EC Endorsement Required?
(HoEs)
Complete
Risk
No
Assessment
EC Authorisation
(Chief Engineers)
Develop and complete
Class 2 EC
EC Endorsement Notify CC
(HoEsCDelivery ManagersCFleet
Managers other stakeholders)
Approved EC EC Authorisation
(Relevant HoE )
End
Figure 1 - Process Flow chart
6.1. Statement of Principles

(a) MTM supports the introduction of new technology and innovation into MTM
Rolling Stock and Infrastructure operational assets, subject to evidence that
they contribute to achieving MTM Goals and Objectives. For example, a
reduction in whole of life asset costs, improvements in asset reliability and
availability, improvements in maintenance and operational safety and
improvements in MTM service delivery standards.
(b) It shall be demonstrated (when required) via an appropriate documented risk
assessment (in accordance with procedure L0-SQE-PRO-001 and using
template L4-SQE-FOR-064), that the risks generated by the EC to the
achievement of MTM Goals and Objectives are acceptable and appropriately
controlled. The Risk Analysis shall demonstrate that controls are in place to
ensure that ‘So Far As Is Reasonably Practicable’ that all risk have been
mitigated.
(c) Prior to the introduction of new technology and innovation, MTM shall require
that all existing and future required processes are considered and developed
as appropriate (e.g. procedures, RAMS analysis, Type Approval (TA),
maintenance instructions, spare parts and training).
(d) Where a component or system is proposed to replace an existing component
or system, the existing item may be used as a basis for a comparative risk
assessment. In such cases any change in the maintenance and operating
environment must also be taken into account.
(e) Human factors that are likely to be affected by the EC shall be considered as
part of the risk assessment and addressed within the EC.
(f) The ‘whole of life’ aspects of an EC to be considered where appropriate, with
regards to costs associated with initial outlay, maintenance, obsolescence and
disposal costs.
(g) Relevant documents and systems, including maintenance instructions, plans,
drawings, Ellipse Equipment Register, AEPL, and the Drawing Management
System (DMS) are updated as part of the implementation of the EC.
(h) All appropriate technical stakeholders are consulted and the EC shall be
endorsed, approved and authorised before implementation.
(i) It is strongly recommended that Rolling Stock and Infrastructure engineering
are involved at the earliest stage of proposed configuration or maintenance
change. This will benefit the CC by reducing the rework required if a proposed
change is not accepted.
(j) Where applicable, the Gate Procedure for Projects (L1-PRJ-PRO-002) shall
be adhered to when developing an EC.
6.2. Class 1 Engineering Changes

A Class 1 EC is one that impacts cost, schedule and/or technical
compliance/performance due to one or more of the following factors:
a) To satisfy approved, new or modified operational, functional, non-functional
and/or interface requirements;
b) Changes (including interface characteristics) that affect/alter form, fit or
function;
c) As a result of correcting a design deficiency; or
d) Maintenance (task/frequency). e.g. TMP.
Note 7: Class 1 is default EC category. If in doubt which classification an EC is

categorised, the CC shall assume a ‘Class 1’ classification or attain guidance from the
relevant ERM and HoE(s).
6.2.1. Class 1 EC flow chart
MoC Form 1 EC categorised

Approved as Class 1
## If applicable Project ERB Develop Class 1 EC

process to be followed prior (risk assessment
to completion of the Class 1 required) ##
Engineering Change
EC Endorsement
(HoEs)
EC Authorisation
(Chief Engineer)
Approved EC
Figure 2 - Class 1 EC flowchart
6.2.2. Class 1 EC Process

Once an MoC form 1 has been approved, development of the EC can
commence.
Step 1. Once the ‘MoC Form 1’ has been approved, request an EC number
from the ECRO.
Step 2. Complete the EC form as detailed in section 6.4.
Note 8: Refer to the ‘Engineering Change Form User Guide (L1-CHE-GDL-
031)’ for how to access the EC form from the ‘The Depot’ (Intranet).
Step 3. Ensure relevant attachments are in PDF format only and attached to
the EC. A list of typical attachments are listed below:
• MoC Form 1 and confirmation of approval (Mandatory)
• Risk assessment (L4-SQE-FOR-064) and attendance form
(Mandatory)
• New/Amended drawings (IFC drawings/Detailed Drawings)
• New/Amended documents
• Design reports
• Test reports
• Technical Data Sheets
• Network Configuration Manual Impacted Changes
• Material Safety Data Sheets
• etc.
Step 4. Press the ‘Send Notification’ button to send the EC to the relevant
ERM for review. Refer to ‘Engineering Change Form User Guide (L1-CHE-
GDL-031)’.
6.3. Class 2 Engineering Changes

If the CC considers that the change qualifies to be categorised as a ‘Class 2’ EC, it is
strongly recommended that the CC discuss with both the ERM and relevant HoE(s)
their case whilst the MoC Form 1 is being developed. A ‘Class 2’ EC follows a much
less rigorous path of the EC process as depicted in Figure 3. Class 2 ECs are used
for changes that are assessed having low enough risk and have negligible or no
impact to Form/Fit/Function. Once agreed by both ERM and relevant HoE(s), the EC
shall be taken to the ERB for ratification as a ‘Class 2’ EC.
Step 1. Once the ‘MoC Form 1’ has been approved request a EC number from the
ECRO.
Step 2. Fill out the EC form as detailed in section 6.4.
Note 9: Refer to the ‘Engineering Change Form User Guide (L1-CHE-GDL-031)’ for
how to access the EC form.
Step 3. Ensure relevant documents are in PDF format only and attached to the EC. A
list of typical attachments are listed below:

• Risk Assessments and Attendance Sheet (if required)
• Technical Data Sheets
• etc.
Note 10: A risk assessment (L4-SQE-FOR-064) and attendance form is only required
if requested by ERM or HoE.
Step 4. Press the ‘Send Notification’ button to send the EC to the relevant ERM for
review. Refer to ‘Engineering Change Form User Guide (L1-CHE-GDL-031)’.
6.3.1. Class 2 EC flow chart

MoC Form 1 EC categorised as
Approved Class 2
Is a Risk
Yes Assessment
Required?
Complete
Risk
Assessment No
Develop and complete

Class 2 EC
EC Endorsement
(HoEs/Delivery Managers/Fleet
Managers other stakeholders)
EC Authorisation
(Relevant HoE )
Approved EC
Figure 3 - Class 2 EC flowchart
6.4. Compiling an Engineering Change
6.4.1. EC Number
The EC Number is the number supplied by the ECRO upon request by the CC
and recoded on the EC Register. This is an admin-only field by which the EC
number can only be entered by the ERM or ECRO subsequent to the
provision of an approved MoC Form 1.
6.4.2. EC Title
The EC Title is entered by the CC on the EC form.
6.4.3. Engineering Change Status

The EC Status is a drop down menu, which indicates the status of the EC, this
field is manually updated by the ERM or ECRO. Refer to Table 1 for status
options.
Table 1- EC Status
Status Explanation
Under This status is set when the EC is in development, this status shall
Development remain in in place until the EC is has be approved by the ERM and
the workflow is ready to begin.
In Approval This status is set when the workflow has been initiated.
Workflow
On Hold This status is set when the EC is placed ‘On Hold’ due to
unforeseen circumstances.
EC This status is set when the EC has been ‘Authorised’. Once this
Authorised status is set the EC will become ‘read only’.
Note: This status will only be set once the Chief Engineer (for
Class 1 ECs) or the HoE (for Class 2 ECs) has approved the EC
within the workflow.
EC This status is set when the EC has been implemented/installed.
Completed Verified to have operated in situ for a period of time judged as
adequate to demonstrate accurate and reliable service (after the
Asset Custodian (for Rolling Stock ECs only). Once this status is
set the EC will become ‘read only’.
Withdrawn This status is set when an EC has been withdrawn by the Change
Coordinator. Once this status is set the EC will become ‘read only’.
Superseded This status is set when an EC has been superseded by another
EC, All impacted ECs should be modified to reference each other
relevant EC. Once this status is set the EC will become ‘read only’.
Rejected This status is set when an EC has been rejected by the Chief
Engineer (for Class 1 ECs) or the HoE (for Class 2 ECs), this type
of rejection implies the EC is not proceeding as opposed to
requesting changes to the EC. Once this status is set the EC will
become ‘read only’.
6.4.1. Work Commence Date

The date that physical implementation is expected to commence.
6.4.2. Work Order Number

The Work Order Number allocated for the Change if applicable.
Note: Not adding a Work Order Number may add delay to the review of the
EC.
6.4.3. ERB Number

The ‘ERB Number’ is an admin-only field that is completed by the ERM or
ECRO and therefore can be ignored by the CC. The ERB number indicates at
which ERB meeting the EC was initially presented.
6.4.4. EC Class
The ‘EC Class’ field by default will always be set to ‘Class 1’. An EC can only
be classed as a ‘Class 2’ EC if agreed by both the ERM and relevant Head(s)
of Engineering (HoE). Once agreed the EC shall be taken to the ERB for
ratification.
6.4.5. Network Configuration Manual Impact

If there is Network Configuration Manual (formerly known as the Working
Timetable Addenda) Impact then the CC shall check the ‘Network
Configuration Manual Impact’ box as ‘Yes’. The CC shall attach the marked up
page (or pages) of the Network Configuration Manual as an attachment to the
EC highlighting the necessary changes. The CC will also be responsible to
ensure the appropriate circular is generated and issued to update the Network
Configuration Manual once the change has been implemented.
6.4.6. Authorisation Required

The ‘Authorisation Required’ fields of the EC form is where the relevant
approvers are identified. The CC is to make a considered judgement of the
approvers for review by the ERB and the ECRO will amend accordingly.
Generally the list is comprised of but not limited to:
• The CC;
• The relevant ERM.
• The relevant HoE(s) and other identified stakeholder (e.g. Fleet
managers) as endorsers;
• General Manager Rolling Stock (Rolling Stock only) as approver;
• Chief Engineer as authoriser; and
• General Manager Rolling Stock (Rolling Stock only) for completion.
6.4.7. MoC Number

Regardless of the EC Class the MoC Number related to the EC is to be
entered. Confirmation of MoC Form 1 approval is required to be attached to
the EC.
6.4.8. Other References

This a free field where the CC can enter any other references that may be
relevant to the EC i.e. Rolling Stock Fleet Number.
6.4.9. EC Type
There are two possible options EC Types:
• Configuration; and
• Maintenance.
Note 11: The option ‘Technical Standard’ is no longer used, but remains on
the EC form for historical purposes.
Multiple options can be selected if required.
6.4.10. EC Duration
EC Duration is the anticipated period that the proposed EC shall be in action
for. There are three possible options for EC Duration:
• Permanent;
• Limited for; and
• Trial for.
When either the “Limited for’ or ‘Trial for’ options chosen the duration in either
Days, Months or Years shall also be stated.
A change that is classified as a ‘Trial’ generally is to test the feasibility of the
proposed change. A change that is classified as ‘Limited’ is a change that has
been put in place for limited period, e.g. a foot bridge closure due to staged
works of an EC.
6.4.11. Origin
The origin describes who or where the EC originated from, and state the
purpose of the EC. The purpose of this section is to provide to the
stakeholders background and a framework to understand the EC and where it
may fit in with any strategic or future plans of MTM or other third parties,
including the PTV.
6.4.12. Change Description

This section shall detail the change proposed by the EC, it shall provide
enough information to the stakeholders so they can understand:
• Which assets are changing or being introduced;
• Specific boundaries of operation of the change; and
• Any specific details of maintenance change proposed.
The description shall be supported where applicable with attached documents
such as drawings, depictions, photos, design reports (design calculations) etc.
6.4.13. Advantages
In this section, detail the advantages to be derived in adopting the change
proposed by EC. It should be stated how this change benefits MTM and how
the benefit will be realised and how success of the change is to be measured
particularly for trial ECs.
In the event that the change bears little benefit to MTM, it should be detailed
as to why this is the case, e.g. change is being requested by a third party,
6.4.14. Disadvantages
In the section detail any disadvantages (if any) of what the change proposed
by EC. A disadvantage may be the loss of non-core capability of system.
6.4.15. Waivers
Provide a list of any waivers (if applicable) that relate to this EC. Waivers shall
be approved and attached to the EC.
6.4.16. Assets Impacted

Provide in this section a description of all the assets that will be impacted by
this EC, for example, carriage numbers, asset types, specific asset locations
and EGIs. Though the EC may be a maintenance change, it is still required to
list the assets that will be affected by the proposed maintenance changes.
6.4.17. Means of Identifying Change

Provides maintenance staff and auditors of our processes, the means of
identifying the change that has been implemented. This may consist of a plan,
identification of obvious changes, specific marking of equipment,
manufacturers marks, version numbers for documents, etc.
6.4.18. Life Cycle Cost Impact

Any EC has the potential to affect the life cycle costs of the assets that are
being maintained, including maintenance costs. For example if we introduce a
change to improve reliability, but it requires a greater degree of maintenance
intervention, this may increase the total life cycle cost of the assets it applies
to, however at improved safety and performance levels.
To determine an accurate life cycle cost impact it is important to know the
expected (useful) life of the asset. This is the duration that should be used to
assess to the financial impacts before and after the implementation of the
proposed EC.
The degree to which the life cycle cost impact is to be determined should be
agreed with the Responsible Manager via the MoC Form 2. i.e. Infrastructure
Delivery Manager or General Manager Rolling Stock.
6.4.19. Maintenance Impact

The maintenance impact should describe what impact the proposed EC will
have on how maintenance is performed on our assets. This could include any
specialised tools required, changes to the access arrangements to the assets,
changes to how we monitor for conditional failures, changes to service
requirements, etc.
The maintenance impact should also include if there is any increase in the
maintenance effort and consequently resourcing required to maintain the
assets.
6.4.20. Operational Impact

The operational impact is the impact generated by the EC on the manner by
which Operations provide the rail services. This could include an impact on the
train driver’s environment, signalling changes, training requirements, changes
to safeworking procedures, etc.
The level of detail should be sufficient so that an Operations stakeholder is
able to understand how the proposed EC will impact on operation of rail
services and shall also be described in the MoC Form 2.
6.4.21. Risk Assessment Documentation

There are two options can be chosen using the radio buttons:
• Attach is a risk assessment (as per L4-SQE-FOR-064) that describe
the risks generated by the EC and their control measures. Key risks
and controls shall also be summarised as described in sections
6.4.21.1 through to 6.4.21.6.
• Attach no formal risk assessment (e.g. Class 2 EC), however this shall
be determined by the ERB. The risks generated by the EC and their
control measures shall describe in sections 6.4.21.1 through to
6.4.21.6.
6.4.21.1. Reliability & Availability

The reliability and availability risks are those risks which have a
potential to affect the asset performance and the time assets are
available for use of the assets MTM that maintain.
For example, some reliability and availability risk may be,
equipment not as reliable as anticipated, new equipment causes
reliability issues with adjacent assets, new maintenance frequency
may not allow for servicing leading to increase break-downs,
applying new standards may lead to greater down-time of
equipment.
6.4.21.2. Maintenance & Maintainability

The maintenance and maintainability risks are those risks which
have a potential to affect how maintenance is performed on assets
and how easily that maintenance is able to be performed.
For example, some maintenance and maintainability risks may be,
new equipment may be confused with current equipment and
incorrect maintenance performed, hot weather may affect the
ability of staff to access new equipment, location of new equipment
may require new access equipment that MTM does not currently
have.
6.4.21.3. Supportability, Spares & Training

The supportability, spares and training risks are those risks which
have a potential to affect the ability of MTM to support the
maintenance staff to perform their maintenance, access to and
appropriateness of spares and any special training required for
new/changed assets or impacted maintenance practices.
For example, some supportability, spares and training risks may
be, maintenance staff not available for training before new assets
are commissioned, training leads to maintenance staff making
errors on maintenance of other equipment, supplier goes bankrupt
during life of the asset, spares are not suitable for the maintenance
strategy applied by MTM, maintenance software does not operate
on current IT equipment.
6.4.21.4. Safety & Environmental

Safety and environmental risks are those risks which have a
potential to cause harm to people, property and the environment.
For example, some safety and environmental risks may be, new
maintenance tasks leading to Repetitive Strain Injury in
maintenance staff, chemical/lubricant loss contaminating wetland
area, staff caught between moving parts leading to injury, noise
generated by new equipment adversely impact on local residents,
new platform surface leads to an increase in falls at stations, etc.
6.4.21.5. Financial
Financial risks are those risks which have the potential to affect the
financial performance and sustainability of MTM and its Divisions
and Departments. How funding is to be provided should be
identified.
For example, some financial risks may be, expected life of new
asset is greater than achieved in operation requiring renewal at an
earlier cycle than budgeted for, anticipated costs of training are
greater than planned, supplier increases costs of spares greater
than allowed for in budget, poor equipment increases Passenger
Weighted Minutes (PWMs).
6.4.21.6. Customer & Operational

Customer and operational risks are those risks which have the
potential to affect the customer experience of MTM rail services
and the operation of MTM rail services.
For example, some customer and operational risks may be, design
of station building leads to an increase in localised graffiti and
customer complaints, new train radio system increases time it
takes for drivers to log onto system after changing trains, new
signal design creates confusion due to its similarity in shape, but
difference in function to other signals, new escalators do not allow
for easy two by two standing by customers slowing down egress
from station, new platform shelters do not provide wet weather
protection leading to crowding on platform and discomfort to
customers, etc.
6.4.22. New Documents

This section shall list (or reference an attached list) any new documents that
will be established as part of the implementation of this EC. It shall include
documents/drawings by title and number.
6.4.23. Revised Documents

This section shall list (or reference an attached list) any documents that will be
revised as part of the implementation of this EC. It shall include
documents/drawings by title, number and revision status.
6.4.24. Withdrawn Documents

This section shall list (or reference an attached list) any documents that will be
withdrawn as part of the implementation of this EC. It shall include
documents/drawings by title, number and revision status.
6.4.25. Implementation Plan

The implementation plan is a list of all implementation tasks required to fully
implement the EC. When all implementation tasks are complete, EC
implementation is considered complete. This satisfies all responsibilities the
CC has in relation to the proposed EC.
The detail of the implementation plan should be to a sufficient level in the key
stages to give confidence to the ERM that all the tasks required will be
completed and allowing for future auditing, but should not be so onerous as to
list out every single step required to design, construct, commission, update
records, etc. The majority of tasks listed on the implementation plan should be
focused on ensuring all asset information data is updated as part of the EC
implementation, any new instructions, training, spares and standards are
available before commissioning, and any specific approval gates required
during implementation of the EC.
For example some implementation tasks may be:
• Provide spares to signals depot
• Occupation
• Distribute new Maintenance Instruction to maintenance staff
• Update PassAssets
• Provide as-built drawings to DMS
6.4.26. Funding and Expenditure Responsibilities

The funding and expenditures section is to detail which area or organisation
shall be responsible for funding of the implementation, maintenance, renewal
and disposal of the EC.
6.4.27. Attachments
Attachments are to be in PDF format only (unless agreed with the ERM), this
is eliminates the risk of unintended changes made to attachments and
ensures the format is readable by all reviewers. Attachment shall also be
cross-referenced within EC for context.
Expected attachments:
• MoC Form 1 and confirmation of approval
• Risk assessment (L4-SQE-FOR-064) and attendance form(Mandatory
for Class 1 ECs)
• Design reports
• Test reports
• Data Sheets
• Depictions/Photos
• Pertinent emails/correspondence
• etc.
6.5. Engineering Change Approval

As the EC form is in a SharePoint browser based format, it possess an in built
workflow which is used to review and authorise the EC. The minimum required
reviewers is depicted in Figure 4, however it should be noted that for every EC the
reviewers shall be determined by the ERB. At the behest of the CE Figure 4 may be
altered for an EC where required.
Workflow
ERB
ERB
‘Send
Notification’
ERM
Review EC EC
Engineering Change Mailbox
Email Sent to ERM and
A C
u o
th m
Endorser 1 o p
Preparation ri
se
le
ti Asset Custodian
(Change ERM Endorser 2 Authoriser d o
n (RS only)
Coordinator) Endorser n
Workflow output sent via

e-mail to Engineering
Change mailbox
St En
ar d
t o
o f
Figure 4 - EC Approval Process
f W
W
o o
rk rk
fl fl
o
6.6. Urgent Engineering Change Authorisation
If it is necessary to implement a configuration or maintenance change before an EC
can be authorised by the EC process, the CE may provide interim authorisation
pending EC completion and authorisation. The approach to have an interim
authorisation shall be made through relevant HoE or ERM. The CE shall document
the interim authorisation, document any conditions (including timeframes) and notify
the CC, ERM, and Asset Custodian (AC) (for Rolling Stock only).
6.7. Responsibilities
6.7.1. Change Coordinator (CC) is responsible for:

• In collaboration with the ECRO, registering, filing and distribution of the
EC.
• Gathering all design detail and information in support of the EC.
• In collaboration with the ERM, determining the scope and depth of any
risks assessments required, and identification of all appropriate
stakeholders.
• Ensuring any determined risks assessments are conducted and all
identified stakeholders are consulted.
• Compiling the EC Document.
• Overall co-ordination of the implementation of the EC, such that all

tasks listed in the EC Document are completed.
It is not a requirement for the CC to be technically proficient in all areas that
are affected by the EC, but rather have the ability to determine where
technical advice is required and seek support as appropriate.
The CC shall have an understanding of risk management and its principles,
and how these principles can be utilised in developing the EC, and managing
the risks the EC generates.
6.7.2. The EC Review Manager (ERM) is responsible for:

• In collaboration with the CC, determining the scope and depth of risk
assessments required, and determining the appropriate stakeholders
to be consulted.
• Reviewing the completed EC Document with all associated risk
assessments, designs, plans, analyses, etc., and ensuring the EC
Procedure has been appropriately followed considering the risks and
controls the EC generates.
• Acceptance of the EC Document as fully prepared and appropriate for
further endorsement, approval and authorisation.
The role of the ERM is to ensure that each EC; is robust; technical aspects are
appropriately approved; risk assessments cover all risks to an appropriate
level; and provides sufficient information to allow endorsement, approval, and
authorisation.
6.7.3. Endorsers (HoEs/Delivery Managers/Fleet Managers other Stakeholders)

are responsible for:
• Endorsing the change proposed by the EC in respect to the HoE’s
discipline.
• Authorising the implementation of the Class 2 EC which in turn allows
for the implementation of the change described in the EC to
commence.
6.7.4. Chief Engineer (CE) is responsible for:

• Authorising the implementation of the Class 1 EC which in turn allows
for the implementation of the change described in the EC to
commence.
6.7.5. Asset Custodian (AC) is responsible for:

• Allowing the progression of an EC after the need for an EC is
identified.
• Confirming a proposed CC or if required, nominating a CC for the EC.
• Approving the implementation of the EC.
• Accepting EC implementation completion and acceptance of residual
risks.
Note 12: The AC role is applicable to Rolling Stock ECs only

By accepting EC implementation completion, the AC discharges the CC from
any further responsibility in relation to EC implementation and accepts all
residual risks generated by the implementation of the EC.
The AC for Rolling Stock is the GM Rolling Stock. The AC may delegate their
responsibilities in relation to the EC Procedure except for ‘Approving the
implementation of the EC’.
6.7.6. Engineering Change Review Officer (ECRO) is responsible for:

The ECRO shall perform the initial review of the EC prior to submission to the
ERB. The ECRO shall update the EC Register to indicate the EC is
completed, and file the EC Document appropriately.
7. Records
The EC is a SharePoint browser based electronic form, SharePoint not only acts as
the interface to the form but also is the repository for all EC since the Electronic EC
form was introduced. To access the EC tool click on the below link.
http://teamsites.metrotrains.com.au/chiefengineer/ec/Pages/default.aspx
8. Engineering Change Guidance Notes

The guidance notes below provide further detail several tasks that are required to
complete the EC.
8.1. Approved Form 1

The CC shall ensure the associated MoC Form 1 has been approved for all ECs.
8.2. Register EC
The CC shall advise the ECRO of the EC under development. The ECRO shall
register the EC in the EC Register and shall provide the CC with the EC Number. The
ECRO shall also type the EC Number in to the admin only field of the EC form.
8.3. Determine Scope and Depth of Risk Assessment: Determine Stakeholders

The purpose of this step is to determine at an early stage all the appropriate
stakeholders who will be affected by the EC. It is a further purpose of this step, based
on the complexity of the EC, that an appropriate risk assessment scope and depth
will be determined. The risk assessment shall use template L4-SQE-FOR-064.
The following criteria apply when planning risk assessments as part of EC process:
• An EC risk assessment will be held for all ECs, unless prior agreed otherwise
by the Chief Engineer and/or ERM.
• EC risk assessments must use the current MTM risk assessment template
(L4-SQE-FOR-064).
• EC risk assessment will cover engineering/technical/system risks associated

with the scope of the EC.
• Non-engineering/technical/systems risks, such as OH&S risks and
construction/installation risks, will be assessed separately, captured in the
Project Risk Register and addressed/implemented by the SWMS process and
documentation.
• The Risk Assessment shall be FINAL and NOT in DRAFT. The risk
assessment has gained final endorsement form the associated risk facilitator.
• Rejected Controls shall have the reason for their rejections included in the
‘Comments/Assumptions’ field of the risk assessment.
• All proposed Controls with the status of ‘Explore Further’ relating to the scope
of the EC shall be resolved prior to the EC being submitted and have either an
‘Approved’ or ‘Rejected’ status.
Note 13: Any proposed Controls with the status of ‘Explore Further’ that extend
beyond the scope of the EC (e.g. staged EC) shall have the rationale detailed
in the ‘Comments/Assumptions’ field of the risk assessment .
Note 14: OH&S risks that are inherent in, and associated with, the product/system
that is subject of the EC (for example inherent in the product’s design) may be
considered and assessed as part of the EC risk assessment.
8.4. Review EC:

The CC shall advise the ERM that EC is ready for review via the ‘Send Notification’
function in the EC tool. The ERM shall review the EC for completeness. It is not
specifically the ERMs role to ensure the EC is technically feasible as this is the role of
the endorsers that are to be determined by the ERB.
8.5. Obtain Approval and Authorisation.

Once the ERM has reviewed the EC and has deemed to be acceptable to be formally
reviewed the EC shall be sent to ERB to determine to appropriate endorsers. Once
the endorsers of the EC have been identified the ERM (or ECRO if delegated) shall
start the workflow within the EC tool.
The lead times set for review is 5 day for each reviewer with the goal of a 10 day lead
time for the entire review.
8.6. Implement Change as per EC Document

The CC shall oversee the list of tasks to implement the EC as per the EC Document.

L1 CHE PRO 031 Engineering Change Procedure

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

L1 CHE PRO 031 Engineering Change Procedure

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

ENGINEERING CHANGE PROCEDURE

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

Approval Date Version Description

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

3. References and Associated Documents ....................................................... 4

4. Abbreviations and Acronyms ........................................................................ 4

5. Definitions and Responsibilities .................................................................... 5

8. Engineering Change Guidance Notes ......................................................... 23

Figure 1 - Process Flow chart ..................................................................................................8

Figure 2 - Class 1 EC flowchart .............................................................................................10

Figure 3 - Class 2 EC flowchart .............................................................................................12

Figure 4 - EC Approval Process ............................................................................................21

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

3. References and Associated Documents

4. Abbreviations and Acronyms

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

5. Definitions and Responsibilities

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

Engineering The introduction or modification to the configuration or maintenance

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

EwB to decide if change is

## If applicable Project ERB Develop Class 1 EC

Figure 1 - Process Flow chart

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.1. Statement of Principles

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.2. Class 1 Engineering Changes

Note 7: Class 1 is default EC category. If in doubt which classification an EC is

6.2.1. Class 1 EC flow chart

MoC Form 1 EC categorised

## If applicable Project ERB Develop Class 1 EC

Figure 2 - Class 1 EC flowchart

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.2.2. Class 1 EC Process

6.3. Class 2 Engineering Changes

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

• New/Amended drawings (IFC drawings/Detailed Drawings)

6.3.1. Class 2 EC flow chart

Develop and complete

Figure 3 - Class 2 EC flowchart

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.4. Compiling an Engineering Change

6.4.3. Engineering Change Status

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.4.1. Work Commence Date

6.4.2. Work Order Number

6.4.3. ERB Number

6.4.5. Network Configuration Manual Impact

6.4.6. Authorisation Required

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.4.7. MoC Number

6.4.8. Other References

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.4.12. Change Description

6.4.16. Assets Impacted

6.4.17. Means of Identifying Change

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016

6.4.18. Life Cycle Cost Impact

6.4.19. Maintenance Impact

6.4.20. Operational Impact

6.4.21. Risk Assessment Documentation

L1-CHE-PRO-031 Version: 1 Effective from: 12th September 2016