L1 PRJ Pro 009

MTM LXRP DESIGN AND TECHNICAL REVIEW
PROCEDURE
L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016
Approval
Amendment Record
Date of Issue Version Description

15/04/2016 1 Initial issue
Approving Manager: Chief Engineer Approval Date: 15/04/2016 Next Review Date: 15/04/2019
PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 1 of 39
PROCEDURE
Table of Contents
1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 3
2 Scope ................................................................................................................................... 3
3 Relationship to other standards ......................................................................................... 4
4 References ........................................................................................................................... 4
5 Terminology and Descriptors ............................................................................................. 5
6 Engineering Review Terms of Reference (ToR) ................................................................ 9
7 Approach and Methodology ............................................................................................. 10
8 Responsibilities ................................................................................................................. 11
8.1 MTM Projects and Planning .................................................................................................... 11
8.2 The Designer .......................................................................................................................... 12
8.3 MTM Engineering ................................................................................................................... 15
8.4 MTM Asset Management ........................................................................................................ 16
8.5 MTM Infrastructure Delivery ................................................................................................... 17
9 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 17
Appendix 1 – LXRP Design and Technical Review Flow Chart ........................................................... 17
Appendix 2 – Engineering Design Review Comments Sheet .............................................................. 18
Appendix 3 – Engineering Design Review Checklists .......................................................................... 19
Appendix 4 – Engineering Design Artefacts List .................................................................................. 20
Appendix 5 – Design and Engineering Management Plan - Typical List of Contents .......................... 29
Appendix 6 – Design Report - Typical List of Contents ........................................................................ 32
Appendix 7 – Proof Engineering Requirements ................................................................................... 36
Appendix 8 – Proof Engineering Certificate of Compliance ................................................................. 38
PROCEDURE
1 Purpose
Metro Trains Melbourne (MTM) is an Accredited Rail Transport Operator (ARTO) and
under the Rail Safety Act (2006) must ensure the safe construction, operation and
maintenance of all of the railway infrastructure and assets. In addition, as a franchisee,
MTM must comply with the terms and conditions of the Projects Agreement – Train
with the State Government of Victoria (the State). To achieve this, MTM has
implemented a Safety Management System (SMS) and Engineering Management
System (EMS) methodology. The EMS methodology describes the key concepts of the
EMS and mandates management and technical reviews of engineering design as part
of a project or asset renewal and which is to be incorporated into the operating railway.
The purpose of this procedure is to define the process and responsibilities required for
MTM to undertake Stakeholder Requirements Assessment (SRA), Preliminary
Requirements Review (PRR), Systems Requirements Review (SRR), Concept Design
Review (CDR, optional), Formal Engineering Reviews (FER) and Acceptance Reviews
(AR) of the Level Crossing Removal Program (LXRP) delivered under the Projects
Agreement - Train, and Melbourne Metropolitan Rail Network (MMRN) configuration
changes that require design input. The design reviews are intended to establish design
control against agreed methodologies, standards, procedures, and defined functional
and operational requirements, while also considering the impact on MTM maintenance
practices.
Note: The SRA and FER described in this procedure do not constitute any design
approval or engineering validation by MTM. All designs and specifications provided to
MTM Engineering from Designers are to be independently verified and compliant to
appropriate design standards. All responsibility for the design and specifications rests
with the Designer.
2 Scope
This document applies to the design management and technical review of
requirements (SRA), requirements and designs (FER) and As-built drawings (AR)
prepared on behalf of MTM Projects or other stakeholders. This procedure also
applies to the design review for the State, Franchise, Third Party and MTM
Infrastructure Renewals works proposed on the MTM rail network covering all
disciplines including:
 Architectural
 Building Services
 Railway Track and Civil
 Train Electrical Network
 Signals
 Telecommunications
 Structural (inc. Stations)
 Rolling Stock
PROCEDURE
3 Relationship to other standards

a) This procedure is a project specific application of EMS Methodology (L1-CHE-MAN-
001) and is to be read in conjunction with that document. It replaces the Design and
Technical Review Procedure (L1-NAM-PRO-002) within the LXRP however, the
Signalling Design Technical Review Procedure (L1-NAM-PRO-001) remains
applicable within the LXRP.
4 References
Item Number Title
1 L1-PRJ-PRO-007 As-Built Drawings – Managed by Projects
2 L2-ELN-PRO-01 Asset Acceptance Process Procedure
3 L0-HMR-MAN-001 Business Rules Manual for the Contracting Rail Safety Worker
4 L1-CHE-GDL-052 Chief Engineers Directive, Assignment Of Engineering
Authority
5 L4-CHE-FOR-026 Critical Design Review (CDR) Checklist
6 L3-PRJ-PRO-005 Design Change Request (DCR) Form
7 L1-ASY-PRO-001 Engineering Change Control Procedure
8 L4-CHE-FOR-046 Engineering Design Review Comments Sheet
9 L1-CHE-POL-001 Engineering Drawings Management Policy (Design/IFC/As-
Builts)
10 L1-CHE-MAN-001 Engineering Management Systems (EMS) Methodology
11 L0-SQE-PRO-031 Enterprise Risk Management Procedure
12 L4-PRJ-FOR-039 Final Impact Statement template
13 L4-PRJ-FOR-041 Final Operational Requirements template
14 L1-PRJ-PRO-002 Gate Procedure for Projects
15 L0-SQE-PRO-046 Human Factors Integration Procedure
16 L1-SQE-PRO-001 Management of Change Process
17 L4-CHE-GDL-002 Master Engineering 'As Built' DMS Register Process Map
18 L4-PRJ-FOR-045 Preliminary Impact Statement template
19 L4-PRJ-FOR-046 Preliminary Operational Requirements template
20 L1-AMS-MAN-005 RAMS Manual
21 L1-AMS-PRO-003 RAMS Procedure
22 L2-PRJ-GDL-008 Risk Management Process Guideline
23 L0-SQE-MAN-002 Safety Management System Manual
24 L1-NAM-PRO-001 Signalling Design Technical Review Procedure
25 L4-CHE-FOR-029 Stakeholder Requirements Assessment (SRA) Checklist
26 L1-CHE-PRO-001 Standard Waiver Procedure
27 L4-CHE-FOR-024 System Requirements Review (SRR) Checklist
28 L1-CHE-PRO-004 Type Approval Procedure
29 L1-NPD-PRO-002 Works Readiness Procedure
PROCEDURE
5 Terminology and Descriptors

Acceptance Review The Acceptance Review reviews the completeness of all contractual
(AR) activity to provide for formal acceptance/commissioning of the
completed system. As part of this activity, MTM Engineering
undertakes a review of the As-Built documentation to assess
compliance with PTV Infrastructure Drawings Standards VRIOGS
007.2 or PTV Infrastructure Drafting Standards as applicable prior to
submission to PTV for Authorisation.
Accredited Rail Accredited Rail Transport Operator is a Rail Transport Operator
Transport Operator accredited under the Rail Safety National Law to carry out rail
(ARTO) operations. They have demonstrated to National Rail Safety Regulator
that they have the competency and capacity to implement a Safety
Management System (SMS) and to safely manage changes to their
operations.
Concept Design Gate The need for a post-award CDG is determined at SRR. The
(CDG) Designer(s) present(s) the concept design (before approval to proceed
to preliminary and detailed design) to confirm requirements clarity and
acceptability/validity of proposed design approach and solution
preceding development of specifications that will drive the design.
Concepts/Options A number of options may be developed during the Project
Development phase in response to the POR and included in the PIS.
An Options Assessment is completed and submitted to the Project
Steering Committee (PSC) for endorsement of the preferred option.
The FOR is endorsed by the stakeholders and the preferred
concept/option appended.
Concept (Tender) If required, a Concept (Tender) Design may be prepared by the
Design Designer is response to the FOR in order to describe the proposed
physical/functional system architecture and satisfy the Functional
Baseline formed at the successful completion of the SRR. The Concept
(Tender) Design is presented for review at the Concept design Gate
(CDG).
Critical Design Review The Critical Design Review confirms final design satisfies system
(CDR) requirements from SRR. At CDR, having addressed any open review
comments from DDR, the Designer seeks agreement from MTM
Engineering for the design to proceed to Issued for Construction (IFC)
status.
Design Report (DR) Design Report. This is a report prepared by the design consultant
based on the ARTO’s Project Brief, agreed Standards and Final
Operational Requirements which is prepared at a defined phase of
design i.e. Concept (Tender), Preliminary, Detailed and Final Design
phase. Refer Appendix 6 for typical contents.
Designer Rail Safety Worker (RSW, as defined under Rail Safety National Law)
engaged in the design of railway infrastructure and/or assets for a
project or Engineering configuration change. MTM required
competencies for RSW can be found at
http://www.metrotrains.com.au/academy/
Design and Engineering A plan submitted by the Designer detailing how the design process will
Management Plan be managed and drawings submitted to EDR for review, comment and
(DEMP) feedback. Refer Appendix 5 for typical contents.
Detailed Design Review The Detailed Design Review confirms detail design is essentially
(DDR) complete and satisfies system requirements from SRR. At DDR, the
Designer will expose to MTM the overall design, development and
qualification testing approach.
PROCEDURE
Drawing Management A plan submitted by the Designer detailing how the documents and
Plan (DwMP) drawings for each design stage will be managed and submitted for
review, and incorporate DMS requirements. The DwMP is required to
incorporate a schedule for the delivery of drawings and reports
identifying timing for issue of design packages to the ARTO for review.
Drawing Management Drawing Management System managed by the Department of Public
System (DMS) Transport Victoria (PTV).
Engineering Authority Engineering Authority (EA). The ARTO’s Chief Engineer (CE) is
(EA) deemed to hold “Design Approval Authority” (DAA) and selected MTM
project engineering personnel and/or Contractor’s designer(s), and
those of any subcontracted designer(s), may be conferred with “Design
Authority” (DA) once having been assessed and approved by the DAA,
or delegate(s) (viz. Head(s) of Engineering, Engineering Manager –
LXRA, Design Review Managers - LXRA).
Assignment of EA includes a ‘Judgement of Significance’ (JoS).
Engineering Change The procedure for initiating, developing, approving, implementing and
(EC) auditing changes to the configuration, maintenance and technical
standards of MTM Rolling Stock and Infrastructure.
Engineering Engineering Management System provides an engineering framework
Management System for project and infrastructure engineering activities managed by MTM. It
methodology (EMS) adopts a systems engineering approach to governance, management
and technical aspects of engineering work of particular relevance to
projects that involve complex and/or service/safety critical engineering
solutions.
Formal Engineering An overall technical/engineering review undertaken to assess the
Reviews (FER) compatibility of a functional specification or engineering drawing
against the Final Operational Requirements (FOR) and technical
standards by taking into consideration the existing infrastructure and
infrastructure asset management and maintenance processes.
Final Impact Statement The Final Impact Statement uses the FOR as a basis and is an
(FIS) assessment of the anticipated impacts during execution and after
completion of the project. It includes assessment of non-conformance
to standards, project impacts, issues and costs, and disruption
management and handover strategies.
Final Operational The Final Operational Requirements are the set of agreed
Requirement (FOR) requirements for the project. They are described in a report that’s
details the purpose and objects of the project, the selected option,
current operations and final operational requirements, and statement
regarding ability of the concept/option to satisfy the Final Operational
Requirements
Franchise The Franchise means the “Projects Agreement – Train” between the
State of Victoria and Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd
Issue For Review (IFR) Plans and documents issued by the Designer for review by MTM
Issue For Construction Plans and documents may proceed to Issue For Construction status
(IFC) once all review comments have been addressed to MTM’s satisfaction
(Agreed Status = “Closed”).
Independent (Third Rail Safety Worker (RSW) engaged to conduct an independent third
Party) Reviewer (IR) party review. The reviewer must be independent, either from a different
design house or from the same organisation but a separate office
location and shall not be involved with the design of any other
associated elements of that particular project.
PROCEDURE
Judgement of JoS is an assessment of the technical risk introduced by the

Significance (JoS) implementation of the design and must consider both the probability
and consequence of partial performance or failure of the design.
Designs and technical activities are deemed to be either ‘Significant’ or
‘Non-Significant’.
Following the above definition, all designs or technical activities should
be classed as either Significant or Non-Significant. Designs or technical
activities judged as Significant will be deemed high risk, and should be
subject to a more rigorous design review and approval processes.
Level Crossing LXRP refers to the Victorian Government program to remove 50 level
Removal Program crossings from metropolitan Melbourne. The Level Crossing Removal
(LXRP) Authority (LXRA) has been established to oversee the planning and
delivery of the program.
Management of The process used to manage any Metro Trains Melbourne (MTM)
Change (MoC) Changes, (any modification/alteration/addition/removal of operations,
asset infrastructure, rolling stock or process) that may affect the safety
and/or operations of MTM railway operations.
MTM Metro Trains Melbourne.
MTM Asset MTM Asset Management is responsible for the Asset Management of
Management (AM) all infrastructure assets within Metro’s lease.
MTM Engineering MTM Engineering is a division within MTM consisting of Infrastructure
Delivery, Rolling Stock, Asset Management and the Office of the Chief
Engineer.
MTM Engineering A spreadsheet used by MTM Engineering to provide comments on the
Design Review design to the Designer and for the Designer to respond. A single
Comments Sheet Comments Sheet is prepared for each Design Package and used to
track the status of comments throughout the design lifecycle to IFC i.e.
through Preliminary (PDR), Detailed (CDR) and Final (TTR) design
stages.
MTM Infrastructure Rail Infrastructure Department responsible for the day to day
maintenance of MTM operational infrastructure.
MTM Operations MTM Division responsible for the management and operation of the
metropolitan train system.
M&R Program The annual Maintenance and Renewal Program managed by MTM
Infrastructure Delivery.
MTM Projects and MTM Division responsible for the planning, development and delivery
Planning of projects.
MTM SOP MTM Strategic Operations Plan. An annual document prepared by
MTM, and submitted to the State, that details:
 MTM's vision for MTM's rail network
 operational philosophies/imperatives proposed to transform the
network
 proposed 'Greenfields Timetable' changes to meet growth in
demand and achieve the vision
 a prioritised list of strategic projects/initiatives required to deliver the
new timetables and improve system reliability.
Preliminary Design The PDR determines that the preliminary design meets systems
Review (PDR) requirements agreed at SRR with acceptable risk and within cost &
schedule requirements /constraints and is sufficiently mature to
proceed to detailed design. Refer EMS.
PROCEDURE
Preliminary Preliminary Requirements Review assesses whether the User

Requirements Review requirements are sufficiently acceptable and mature, to proceed to
(PRR) SRR and subsequent engineering specification and design phases with
acceptable risk, within cost and schedule requirements and constraints.
Refer EMS.
Preliminary Impact The Preliminary Impact Statement uses the POR as a basis and is an
Statement (PIS) assessment of the anticipated impacts during execution and after
completion of the project. It includes assessment of non-conformance
to standards, project impacts, issues and costs, and disruption
management and handover strategies.
Preliminary Operational The Preliminary Operational Requirements are the set of agreed
Requirements (POR) requirements for the project. They are described in a report that’s
details the purpose and objects of the Project, the selected Option,
current operations and final operational requirements, and statement
regarding ability of the Concept to satisfy the Final Operational
Requirements.
Project Brief The Project Brief is a document that defines the overall scope, costs,
and program risk for the project, and contains the Functional
Specifications, the Final Operational Requirements (FOR), the Final
Impact Statement (FIS) and the Concept Design for the Project. It
establishes the design basis to be adopted by the Project.
RAMS Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety – The parameters and
performance targets that must be considered during the Engineering
Review process.
SFAIRP Term used for risk assessment outcome – So Far As Is Reasonably
Practicable as defined under the Rail Safety Act (2006).
SID Register The Safety In Design Register detailing the safety related items raised
and considered during the design development and design review
process.
Stakeholder The Stakeholder Requirements Assessments are conducted during the
Requirements pre-award ‘Development’ phase to ensure that System Requirements
Assessments 1 & 2 are assessed early, at a high level, against operational, technical,
interface, quality, safety and maintenance requirements.
Systems Requirements Systems Requirements Review agrees & baselines established
Review (SRR) ‘system requirements’ (functional, performance and non-functional) pre
design. SRR confirms MTM’s comprehension of the work scope and
formally agree the initial version of the documents that will form the
Functional Baseline. Refer EMS.
Test Readiness Review Test Readiness Review assessed the status of:
(TRR)  installation/testing;
 open ECs, open Waivers, open test problem reports, open
requirements and design issues; and
 readiness to proceed to, and review planning for, remaining
‘system’ integration and testing and commissioning.
Waiver A departure from MTM endorsed Standard(s) and other source
requirements applicable to maintain, upgrade, renew, build and
commission MTM Rolling Stock and Infrastructure Operational Assets.
PROCEDURE
Works Readiness The internal MTM governance process which enables the Chief
Procedure Operating Officer to:
 Have full confidence (and supporting documentation) that planned
major work packages are in an appropriate state of readiness
before works commence, and
 Postpone the commencement of work packages if the planned
works are not in an appropriate state of readiness.
6 Engineering Review Terms of Reference (ToR)

The ToR define the scope, objectives, participant roles and competences, review
criteria, inputs, method, outputs and timeliness for a review, and are specific to the type
of review being undertaken.
The EMS shall constitute the ToR for SRA and FER, and shall provide assurance that
all the requirements of the Accredited Rail Transport Operator’s (ARTO’s) Safety
Management System (SMS) (including operational and functional requirements, and
appropriate standards) and terms and conditions of the “Projects Agreement – Train”
with the State (including provision of comments on design documentation within 10
working days of receipt) have been met.
The following Stakeholders Requirements Assessment (SRA), Formal Engineering
Reviews (FER) and Acceptance Review (AR) are defined in the EMS. They may be
either internal or external to MTM and are held within MTM, or between MTM,
Designer, Contractor and/or Client.
Development Phase:
 Stakeholders Requirements Assessment (SRA, 1 & 2)
Delivery Phase:
 Preliminary Requirements Review (PRR);
 Systems Requirements Review (SRR);
 Concept Design Gate (CDG);
 Preliminary Design Review (PDR);
 Detailed Design Review (DDR);
 Critical Design Review (CDR);
 Test Readiness Review (TRR); and
 Acceptance Review (AR).
The Development Specialist (Development Phase, post nomination) or Project Manager
(Delivery Phase, gate 3 through 6) is responsible for providing the inputs for each
review.
A flow chart showing the SRA and FERs and relationship to the Gate Procedure for
Projects (L1-PRJ-PRO-002) and the Works Readiness Procedure (L1-NPD-PRO-002)
is included in Appendix 1.
PROCEDURE
Judgement of Significance (JoS)

MTM Engineering assesses the significance of design submitted for PDR. Design
deemed to be Significant at this review, and therefore high risk, is subject to all of the
reviews designed in the EMS and listed above. Design deemed to be Non-Significant
at PDR, and therefore low risk, is not required to be submitted for further review by
MTM Engineering.
Note: Where a design changes following PDR, its significant must be reassessed and
may be upgraded or downgraded as appropriate. If a design changes from Significant
to Non-Significant, a decision record must be created by appropriate Engineering
Authority with a statement justifying that decision.
7 Approach and Methodology

The aim of the SRA, FER is to ensure requirements and design produced by the
Designer will meet MTM’s obligations as an ARTO under the Rail Safety Act (RSA)
2006 (Vic) and franchisee under the Projects Agreement – Train with the State. The
aim of the AR is to ensure that the As-built drawings conform to VRIOGS 007.2 or PTV
Infrastructure Drafting Standards as applicable prior to submission to PTV for
Authorisation.
The SRA and FER are conducted using the appropriate Review Checklist and outcome
recorded on the MTM Engineering Design Review Comments Sheet (L4-CHE-FOR-
046) or equivalent design review comments sheet provided by the Designer.
For each SRA and FER the following method is followed:
1. The Designer submits the documents to MTM Engineering for review;
2. MTM Engineering review the submitted documents in accordance with the EMS
and Review Checklists;
3. MTM Engineering record comments from the review on the design review
comments sheet;
4. MTM Engineering send the design review comments sheet to the Designer; and
5. The Designer enters responses to the comments made by MTM Engineering on the
design review comments sheet indicating how they propose to address the
comments in the next design phase (Concept and Preliminary Design phases, POR
and PIS) or how they have addressed and closed out the review comment (Detailed
and Final Design phases, FOR and FIS) and sends it back to MTM Engineering.
At the end of the Development stage and at Final design phase, MTM Engineering
indicate that all review comments have been addressed to MTM’s satisfaction by
setting the Agreed Status = “Closed” on the design review comments sheet prior to
sending it to the Designer.
Checklists for the FERs described in the EMS and listed in section 6 above is included
in Appendix 3 of this procedure.
The method for undertaking the AR is described in the Master Engineering 'As Built'
DMS Register Process Map, L4-CHE-GDL-002.
PROCEDURE
8 Responsibilities
MTM has a primary responsibility as the ATRO under the Rail Safety Act (2006) for the
safe construction, operation and maintenance of the railway infrastructure. This
includes the engagement of a Designer to provide an engineering design for the
delivery of a project or significant maintenance and renewal works to be incorporated
as part of the operating railway.
MTM remain responsible for the safe conduct of their rail operations irrespective of
whether or not activities are contracted to other parties. MTM cannot contract out
responsibility for safety, and retains responsibility to the extent that they can exercise
control irrespective of the details of the design contract entered into.
As the ARTO, MTM must take all reasonably practicable steps to ensure that design
provided is of an appropriate standard and specification to ensure the continued safety
of the railway operations. Under the Rail Safety Act (2006) Designers are subject to the
safety duty of the ARTO (MTM) for whom they undertake the work and must ensure
that the work undertaken satisfies the SFAIRP principles and complies with MTM’s
SMS to the extent that it applies to the design task undertaken.
8.1 MTM Projects and Planning

MTM Projects and Planning is responsible for the development and delivery of projects
and will arrange and/or coordinate the necessary review of designs through MTM
Engineering required to develop MTM’s requirements and deliver the project. The
management of the SRA and FER of the requirements and designs by MTM
Engineering will be undertaken in consultation with MTM Asset Management and
Network Operations where appropriate.
The MTM Project and Planning responsibilities are defined as follows:
 Develop and deliver MTM projects in accordance with the Projects Agreement with
the State;
 Undertake the role of Change Facilitator in the Management of Change and
Engineering Change processes;
 Provide Preliminary and Final Operational Requirements (POR and FOR),
Preliminary and Final Impact Statement (PIS and FIS), and any Concepts/Options
developed for review by the MTM Engineering;
 Ensure the preparation of documentation that will facilitate the requirements
assessment, design and construction process, in accordance with the MTM
Standards, Operational Requirement, Functional Specification, Project Brief and
Scope of Work documents;
 Arrange and manage the requirements, designs and associated plans and technical
documents prepared by the Designers at the requirements and design stages
described in the EMS for SRA and FER by MTM Engineering;
 Provide a design program and details of occupation schedules for proposed project
works to enable MTM Engineering to plan the timing of documents to be submitted
for review and ensure sufficient resources are available to complete “each stage of
the review” within the agreed timeframes;
 Liaise with MTM Engineering to ensure technical review of all documents relating to
the project are undertake;
 Facilitate the preparation of the DEMP, DwMP and IMP, and ensure they are
submitted to MTM Engineering for review and endorsement;
PROCEDURE
 Liaise with MTM Engineering to identify suitable consultant/s to assist in the review
process;
 Liaise with MTM Engineering to manage resources required to meet project
response deadlines;
 Ensure the relevant Testing and Commissioning Plans and relevant drawings, for
each stage of the project works, are prepared and submitted for review by MTM
Engineering and MTM Infrastructure;
 Ensure the Project Handover responsibilities are achieved, incorporating the close
out of contract issues, provision of As-built/As-in-Service drawings for incorporation
into the PTV DMS; and
 Other responsibilities as outlined in the MTM project management plan.
8.2 The Designer

The Designer is responsible for the preparation of ALL documentation required for
submission to MTM Engineering for SRA and FER at each of the design stages
nominated in the EMS and this procedure. Documents required to be submitted are
described below.
a) Design and Engineering Management Plan

The Designer must provide a Design and Engineering Management Plan (DEMP)
to MTM which addresses the items listed in the typical DEMP contents list in
Appendix 5.
The plan shall define and communicate the processes and procedures to be
employed during the design phase to cover all the design elements for the works
including permanent, stage and temporary. The plan must cover all the disciplines
for each design phase from preliminary design through to final design where
drawings are to be issued for construction.
The DEMP must include a design schedule detailing the design packages to be
submitted for review, how the designs will be submitted, the timing for the
submissions linked to the overall master project schedule and the number of
drawings for each discipline or work package. The Designer must advise MTM
Engineering of any changes to the design schedule.
The plan must describe how Safety in Design (SiD) and Human Factors
Integration (HFI) are implemented within each design stage, and include a SiD
workshop schedule indicating when the Designer proposes to conduct each of the
workshops and list of required participants.
The DEMP must include a comprehensive list of staff to be engaged for each
phase of the design for the project detailing their experience, qualifications and
competencies. The details must be based on the criteria specified in the MTM
Competency Management System for the contracting of Rail Safety Workers. MTM
required competencies are specified in the MTM Competency Matrices and
Supporting Documentation (http://www.metrotrains.com.au/academy/).
The plan must describe the configuration and interface management process to be
employed including Management of Change, Engineering Change, Type Approval,
Waivers, interdisciplinary coordination, interfacing organisations undertaking
design or review, internal and external stakeholders (inc. MTM divisions, other rail
operators, road authorities, etc.)
PROCEDURE
The DEMP must include a section outlining design services during construction
including the principles and processes that will be implemented to manage
Requests for Information (RFIs) relating to design documentation, changes to IFC
design documentation and design non-conformances.
Typically a DEMP would be issued to MTM by the Designer within 4 weeks of
being appointed but in any case prior to the issue of any design drawings for
review.
b) Drawing Management Plan

The design consultant must prepare a Drawing Management Plan (DwMP)
detailing how new drawings created as part of the project design will be managed.
The plan must also demonstrate how existing drawings held in the PTV DMS will
be affected by the new design required to deliver the project.
DMS drawings must be requested for use via the DMS website. Any drawings
borrowed must be updated to comply with PTV Infrastructure Drawing Standards
(formerly VRIOG) standards before being returned to DMS.
The plan should incorporate all engineering disciplines and must:
 List the drawings to be booked out and indicate if these are compliant/non
compliant;
 List all the new drawings prepared for each design discipline;
 List all drawings that become redundant or are superseded by the new
design/s; and
 Detail the document handover process and ensure that at the completion of the
project all As-built information and drawings are submitted to MTM Engineering
Design Review Group via the Project team. The handover submissions should
include:
- PTV Infrastructure Drawing Standards (formerly VRIOG) compliant drawings
to be uploaded into DMS where appropriate;
- The booking in of all un-altered drawings into DMS;
- Photographs of new equipment (OH structures, bridges, civil structures,
signals etc) and aerial photographs for inclusion into PASS Assets; and
- GPS coordinates of all new structures where not shown on the As-built
drawings.
The Designer must submit all As-built information within 4 weeks of project
handover, however, the staging of works within a project may require submission
of as-built information within 4 weeks of the stage work being commissioned to
facilitate the repair and maintenance of assets and the capturing of asset reporting
information into the Ellipse asset management system. The upload of Asset data
into Ellipse must be completed prior to commissioning, however the project team
may be allowed sufficient time to ensure the updating of the Ellipse Asset
Management Reporting system (identifying removed assets and the incorporation
of new assets) and this must be completed within 8 weeks of project handover.
The handover process will involve management of changes to rail assets and the
recording of changes into the Ellipse Data Management System. For details of
this process refer to MTM Document No. L1-ASY-PRO-006, Change of Asset Data
Procedure.
PROCEDURE
All documents uploaded into the Project Document Management System (e.g.
Teambinder, Aconex, Incite) will be automatically archived at the completion of the
Project. All hard copies of As-built drawings shall be stored by MTM Engineering
for 5 years in accordance with the Projects Agreement – Train with the State.
c) Design Drawing Register

The Designer must prepare a Design Drawing Register (DDR) detailing a list by
discipline and package of drawings to be prepared and supplied. The register
should cover the drawings for all railway engineering disciplines and any other
assets and services associated with the project.
The initial drawing register should be submitted within one month after the
Designer has been appointed, usually in conjunction with the DEMP, and be
updated on a regular basis as the design progresses.
The Designer must prepare design packages for each engineering discipline and
include all the relevant drawings applicable to each discipline being developed.
This should also be undertaken for designs associated with staged and temporary
works (Where “hold clouds” are used on stage works design drawings a process
for managing these is to be developed and a register maintained).
d) Design Submissions
The Designer must submit design packages for permanent, stage and temporary
works for FER at each of the design development stages identified in the EMS (as
listed in Section 6 above) and Appendix 1 LXRP Design and Technical Review
Flowchart, in a manner that does not result in an unreasonable number of design
documents being submitted in any given week. For each submission the Designer
is to prepare a Design Report (DR), Design Drawings and calculations sheets
and/or other data used in the preparation of the design. For stage works, the use
of “hold clouds” on drawings is to be minimised. Separate stage works design
packages shall be prepared in cases where excessive hold clouds would
otherwise result. The DR must take into consideration the Project Brief, applicable
standards and the FOR as specified by the ARTO. The DR must detail the design
methodology, safety activities undertaken and provide confirmation that the design
conforms to the FOR specified for works and applicable standards the design, and
provide details of any non-conformances and proposed Waivers. The DR shall
also list the Designers who have prepared the design detailing their experience,
qualifications and competencies (in accordance with MTM Engineering and Design
competency matrix (http://www.metrotrains.com.au/academy).
After the initial submission and review of a design, the Designer must prepare
progressive design package submissions as the design progresses through the
design stages described in the EMS (as listed in Section 6 above) and Appendix
1 LXRP Design and Technical Review Flowchart. The Designer must consider the
comments and issues raised by MTM Engineering for each of these submissions
and ensure that they are addressed the satisfaction of MTM’ Engineering, prior to
proceeding to the next design stage (Note: this may include re-submission of a
design package at the same design stage if the initial submission is deemed to be
incomplete, insufficiently developed and/or contain a large number of errors).
The Designer must demonstrate how the comments and issues have been closed
out and incorporated into the updated designs as part of the subsequent design
submission stages.
PROCEDURE
Once all comments and issues have been addressed the satisfaction of MTM
Engineering (Agreed Status = “Closed” on the Engineering Design Review
Comments Sheet), a design package may proceed to IFC.
The artefacts to be provided by the Designer at each of the design stages are
listed in Appendix 4.
The DR is to address the items listed in the typical DR contents list as indicated in
Appendix 6.
e) Third Party Reviews

For signalling and other safety critical design a Third Party reviewer is required to
achieve an independent design review to satisfy the MTM design control
requirements. The IR must conduct the review of the designs and associated
technical drawings and documents, prepared for the project, and ensure relevant
aspects are considered during the technical review.
The independent review must be completed during the final stage of the design
process. and be conducted by an independent Designer, either from a different
design house or from the same company but a separate office location and shall
not be involved with the design of any other associated elements of that particular
project.
f) Proof Engineering
For structural and bridge designs MTM Engineering may request that the designs
must be checked by a qualified and accredited Proof Engineer.
Proof engineering will be required for the following designs where directed:
 Permanent Structural Works;
 Permanent and Temporary Geotechnical Works; and
 Temporary Structural Works.
Proof engineering shall include a full and independent assessment of all factors
influencing the final integrity of the specified components of the work and shall be
undertaken in order to assure compliance with the Principal’s Project
Requirements.
The requirements for proof engineering are detailed in Appendix 7.
A copy of the Proof Engineering certificate of compliance to be completed by the
Proof Engineer is detailed in Appendix 8.
8.3 MTM Engineering

MTM Engineering provides technical support to MTM Projects and Planning in the form
of SRA, PRR, SRR and FER of designs for projects and significant maintenance and
renewal works in accordance with the EMS.
MTM Engineering is responsible for:-
 Checking that the POR/FOR and PIS/FIS contain a complete, unambiguous and
non-conflicting definition of the functional (inc. interface), performance and non-
functional requirements of the system;
 Checking that the DEMP and DwMP meet the requirements of MTM Engineering
including applicable standards and procedures;
PROCEDURE
 Checking Engineering Change (EC) is submitted by Projects and Planning to cover

the project. Coordinating, reviewing and authorising the implementation of the EC;
 Reviewing the design reports and drawings for ALL disciplines for EACH stage of
the design process and provide comments and feedback to the designer;
 Checking comments submitted after the review have been considered and
incorporated into the next stage of the design;
 Checking the design meets the functional and operational requirements (as
articulated in the FOR);
 Checking the RAMS targets established for the project are met by the design
including maintainability and constructability;
 Checking the relevant SiD workshops are undertaken, and review the project SiD
register;
 Checking that Human Factors are considered in the design process;
 Liaising with MTM Asset Management to review the relevant Testing and
Commissioning Plans, provided by the Project, for each stage of the project works;
 Assessment of design package status with respect to Works Readiness process
gates;
 Undertaking site surveillance (design compliance audits of significant design);
 Checking that all new drawings associated with the project are DMS compliant and
booking them back into the DMS; and
 Preparing requirements and design baselines.
Refer to the attached flow chart in Appendix 1 detailing the Design Review process
outlined above.
8.4 MTM Asset Management

MTM Asset Management is responsible for:
 the review of EC notices prepared for project works
 Providing input into life cycle costing
 Supporting the preparation of the Schedule 4 claims to cover new or altered assets
introduced into the MTM network by a new project or M&R works
 Development of Technical maintenance plans
 Liaise with MTM Engineering to review the relevant Testing and Commissioning
Plans and relevant drawings, provided by MTM Projects, for each stage of the
project works
PROCEDURE
8.5 MTM Infrastructure Delivery

MTM Infrastructure Delivery is responsible for:-
 The delivery of the maintenance and renewals of the rail infrastructure assets on
the MTM network
 Acceptance of the asset after completion of works as part of the hand
back/handover process
 Preparation of EC notices for Infrastructure maintenance renewals as required
9 Appendices
Appendix 1 – LXRP Design and Technical Review Flow Chart

Refer to LXRP Design and Technical Review Flowchart, L4-CHE-GDL-008
PROCEDURE
Appendix 2 – Engineering Design Review Comments Sheet

Refer to Engineering Design Review Comments Sheet, L4-SQE-FOR-046
PROCEDURE
Appendix 3 – Engineering Design Review Checklists

Refer to:
- Stakeholder Requirements Assessment (SRA) Checklist, L4-CHE-FOR-029. Use for

Stakeholder Requirements Review (SRA) 1 (review of POR & PIS) and 2 (review of FOR &
FIS).
- System Requirements Review (SRR) Checklist, L4-CHE-FOR-024. Use also for Preliminary
Requirements Review (PRR).
- Critical Design Review (CDR) Checklist, L4-CHE-FOR-026. Use also for Preliminary Design
Review (PDR) and Detailed Design Review (DDR).
- Test Readiness Review (TRR) Checklist, L4-CHE-FOR-022
PROCEDURE
Appendix 4 – Engineering Design Artefacts List
1 Track
1.1 Options and Concepts
At a minimum, the design packages provided at MTM Project Phase 2, the project
Development phase, must include:
(a) Concept Track General Arrangement Plans;
(b) Typical Cross Sections; and
(c) Design Report.
1.2 Preliminary Design
At a minimum, the design packages provided at MTM Project Phase 5, Preliminary Design
Stage, must include:
(a) Preliminary Track General Arrangement Plans;
(d) Preliminary Vertical Alignment Drawings;
(e) Preliminary Cross Sections;
(f) Preliminary Turnout Crossing Geometry;
(g) Preliminary Geometry Tables;
(h) Preliminary Track Speed and Gauge Schematic;
(i) Preliminary Drainage Scheme;
(j) Preliminary Clearance Diagrams;
(k) Preliminary Design Report (inc. A summary of any Waivers required for development of
the Detailed Design stage); and
(l) Draft Asset List.
1.3 Detailed Design
At a minimum, the design packages provided at MTM Project Phase 5, Detailed Design
(a) Detailed Track General Arrangement Plans;
(b) Detailed Vertical Alignment Drawings;
(c) Detailed Cross Sections;
(d) Detailed Turnout Crossing Geometry;
(e) Detailed Geometry Tables;
(f) Detailed Track Speed and Gauge Schematic;
(g) Detailed Clearance Diagrams;
(h) Detailed drainage design;
(i) Detailed Asset List; and
(j) Design Report.
PROCEDURE
1.4 Final Design

At a minimum, the design packages provided at MTM Project Phase 5, Final Design Stage,
must include:
(a) Final Track General Arrangement Plans;
(b) Final Vertical Alignment Drawings;
(c) Final Turnout Crossing Geometry;
(d) Final Geometry Tables;
(e) Final Track Speed and Gauge Schematic;
(f) Final Clearance Diagrams;
(g) Final drainage design;
(h) Final Design Report (inc. All Waivers completed); and
(i) Final Asset List.
2 Structures
(a) Conceptual drawings including:
a. Overall site plan and layout
b. Plans, Elevations & Typical Sections of the civil structures (indicative sufficient to
illustrate overall concept.).
(b) Design Basis Report including key issues and options considered.
(a) Overall site plan and layout;
(b) General Arrangement Plan;
(c) Elevations & Typical Sections of the civil structures showing clearances, walkways,
track structure, drainage, bearings etc for bridges;
(d) Preliminary foundation layout;
(e) Proposed primary framing & outline of secondary elements for building structures; and
(f) Design Report.
PROCEDURE
2.3 Detailed Design

(a) Detailed Structural General Arrangement Plans;
(b) Detailed plans, elevations and sections of the structural elements including
reinforcement details;
(c) Detailed foundation layout and structural details;
(d) Detailed primary and secondary framing including structural connections;
(e) Construction sequence drawings incorporating construction methodology governing
design (where appropriate);
(f) Design Report;
(g) Geotechnical Design Report; and
(h) Details of structural and material specifications including durability and construction
requirements.
2.4 Final Design
must include:
(a) Final Structural General Arrangement Plans;
(b) Final plans, elevations and cross sections of the structural elements including
reinforcement details
(c) Final foundation layout and structural details
(d) Final primary and secondary framing including structural connections
(e) Details of the temporary works
(f) Final Design Report
(g) Final details of structural and material specifications including durability and
construction requirements
3 Signalling and Communications

Note: Signalling Design Technical Review Procedure (L1-NAM-PRO-001) describes the
design artefacts required to be submitted to MTM Engineering for review. This section is
intended to provide a guide to the artefacts described Signalling Design Technical Review
Procedure. In addition, a list of design artefacts is provided for the Main Cable
Containment/Combined Services Route (CSR) and Local Cable Containment.
PROCEDURE

(a) Combined Services Plan showing:
Note: The combined services plan may be overlaid on aerial photography.
i) Track and civil plan;
ii) Existing Signalling Arrangement Plan (SAP) and trackside signalling equipment
including asset numbers and descriptions;
iii) Major monuments (eg Railway Stations, Side Roads, over bridges, etc);
(b) Concept Signalling Arrangement Plan (SAP)
(c) System Architecture (drawings & block diagrams);
(d) Concept for Main Cable Containment/Combined Services Route (CSR):
i) Proposed location of the CSR (Up/Down track side) and ULX; and
ii) Identification of signalling assets requiring connection via a Local Cable
Containment Route.
(e) Design Report.
Stage includes:
(a) Combined Services Plan showing:
Note: The combined services plan may be overlaid on aerial photography.
i) Track and civil plan (including drainage);
ii) Existing Signalling Arrangement Plan (SAP) and trackside signalling equipment
including asset numbers and descriptions;
iii) Major monuments (eg Railway Stations, Side Roads, over bridges, etc);
iv) Existing railway services;
v) Existing Utility Services and detailed design of Utility Services to be relocated;
vi) OHW mast locations, switched air gaps, etc,;
vii) Existing Main Cable Route/CSR; and
viii) Existing railway corridor access points.
(b) Preliminary Design for Signalling:
i) Signalling Design Management Plan (if not included as part of project DEMP);
ii) Signalling Drawing Management Plan (if not included as part of project DwMP);
iii) Overlapping Design Agreement;
PROCEDURE
iv) CBI Application Data Logic Structure Manual;

v) Signalling Arrangement Plan (SAP);
vi) Tables of Routes;
vii) Track Circuits, Bonding Plan and Signalling Apparatus Plan;
viii) Axle Counter System Overview;
ix) Cable Running Plan;
x) Aspect Sequence Chart;
xi) Datalink Architecture (Smartlock and Westlock) or Network Plan (Westrace and
Westlock);
xii) System Architecture (Westrace and VHLC);
xiii) Power Calculation;
xiv) Power Distribution Plan;
xv) Trackside Functional Module (TFM) Allocation Plan;
xvi) Design Report;
(c) Preliminary Design for Cable Containment:
i) Preliminary Design for Main Cable Containment/Combined Services Route (CSR):
a. Proposed location of the CSR;
b. Containment Type: Conduit, Ground Level Trough, Galvanised Steel Trunking;
c. Number of conduits and location of pits
d. Clash review identifying potential clashes of the CSR with other services
including drainage infrastructure.
ii) Preliminary Local Cable Containment Route, including:
a. identification of signalling assets requiring connection via a Local Cable
Containment Route,
b. preliminary location of trackside signalling equipment,
c. preliminary location of under track crossings;
d. location of pits.
iii) Design Report.
PROCEDURE
3.3 Detailed Design

(a) Detailed Design for Signalling:
i) Final revisions of all design submitted at Preliminary Design Stage;
ii) Location Detailed Design;
iii) Signal Equipment Room (SER) Detailed Design;
iv) Signalling Diagram (Litho);
v) Communication Architecture;
vi) Communications Design;
vii) Communications Design;
viii) Signal Sighting Forms;
ix) Stagework designs;
x) Testing & Commissioning Plan; and
xi) Design Report.
(b) Combined Services Plan:
i) Updated revision of plan submitted at Preliminary Design Stage plus details of
signalling and communications assets to be decommissioned and/or recovered.
(c) Detailed Design for cable Containment:
i) Main Cable Containment/Combined Services Route (CSR) including:
a. Location of the CSR (Up/Down track side), Under Track Crossings and ULX;
b. CSR detailing sections of Conduit, Ground Level Trough, Galvanised Steel
Trunking;
c. Typical trench, Ground Level Trough, Galvanised Steel Trunking cross sections;
d. Number of conduits where the CSR consists of a pit and conduit system;
e. Detailed construction methodology for conduits (open trench, directional bore,
etc);
f. Detailed arrangement across creeks, waterways, bridges, embankments,
cuttings, subways, station platforms and tunnels;
g. Closed out clash review of all previously identified clashes; and
h. Clash review updated to include all clashes of the CSR with other services
including drainage infrastructure.
PROCEDURE
ii) Local Cable Containment Route including:

a. Detailed location (typically within 10-25 m of the final position) of trackside
signalling equipment;
b. Location of Local Cable Containment Route ULX;
c. Construction methodology of each ULX crossings;
d. Local Cable Route connections to trackside signalling equipment;
e. Arrangement of Local Cable Containment on gantries, across creeks,
waterways, bridges, embankments, cuttings, subways, station platforms and
tunnels;
f. Clash review identifying potential clashes of the Local Cable Containment with
other services including drainage infrastructure;
iii) Details of cable pits;
iv) Pits detailed on Drawings:
 Primary cable / ULX pit;
 Secondary cable / ULX pit;
 Location Case Pits;
 Under Road Crossing pit;
 Local cable break out pit;
 Fibre optic joint pits; and
 Fibre optic make-off loop pit.
v) Pit Schedule for all pits on CSR;
vi) Detailed design of all pits to be used;
vii) Proposed details of cable containment (pit and conduit, Ground Level Trough,
Galvanised Steel Trunking) pit entry details;
3.4 Final Design
must include:
i) Final Signalling Design:
Final revisions of all design submitted at Detailed Design Stage;
ii) Combined Services Plan:
Final revision of plan submitted at Detailed Design Stage;
iii) Final Design for Cable Containment:
Final revisions of all design submitted at Detailed Design Stage;
PROCEDURE
4 Overhead Wiring (OHW)

At a minimum, the design packages provided at the MTM Project Phase 2, the project
(a) Detailed Site Survey Drawings containing:
i) Major monuments (e.g. Railway Stations, Side Roads, over bridges, etc.);
ii) Existing railway services;
iii) Existing Utility Services;
iv) Existing track and civil plan;
v) Existing OHW infrastructure; and
vi) Existing railway corridor access points.
(b) Concept layout plans for OHW;
(c) Confirmation of existing Sectioning Diagram and any proposed modifications; and
(d) Design Report.
Stage must include:
(a) Layout plans starting and ending at existing unmodified structures;
(e) Typical cross-sections for each different type of structure and arrangement;
(f) Bridge profiles (Scale – Horizontal 1:500, Vertical 1:50);
(g) Bill of Materials;
(h) List of Waivers; and
(i) Design Report.
4.3 Detailed Design
At a minimum, the design packages provided at MTM Project Phase 5, Detailed Design Stage
must include:
(a) Index sheets;
(b) Detailed layout plans starting and ending at existing unmodified structures;
(c) Detailed cross-sections for each structure location;
(d) Detailed switching arrangement drawings;
(e) Bridge Profile drawings (Scale – Horizontal 1:500, Vertical 1:50);
(f) Detailed Special cross-sections e.g. Basic design drawings, new arrangements;
(g) Detailed Structural and foundation details;
(h) Marked up Sectioning Diagram for discussion with MTM;
(i) Dropper tables;
(j) Detailed Bill of Materials; and
(k) Design Report.
PROCEDURE
4.4 Final Design

At a minimum, the design packages provided at MTM Project Phase 5, Final Design Stage
must include:
(a) Index sheets;
(b) Final layout plans starting and ending at existing unmodified structures;
(c) Final cross-sections for each structure location;
(d) Final switching arrangement drawings;
(e) Final Bridge Profile drawings (Scale – Horizontal 1:500, Vertical 1:50);
(f) Special cross-sections e.g. Basic design drawings, new arrangements;
(g) Final structural and foundation details;
(h) Marked up Sectioning Diagram for discussion with MTM;
(i) Dropper tables;
(j) Detailed Bill of Quantities;
(k) Design Report.
PROCEDURE
Appendix 5 – Design and Engineering Management Plan - Typical List of Contents
1 Introduction
Provides an overview of the project and the element of the design to which the DEMP applies.
Includes such items as:
 Project overview (inc. background, project scope, location and limits of work)
 Interfaces with other works and projects
 Contractors and consultants for the project
 Definitions and Abbreviations
 Key program dates
2 Organisation and Responsibilites

Provides details of the project and design team/s relationship, roles and responsibilities, and
resource and competence management including:
 Design Organisations
 Design Team Structure
 Engineering and Design Management Roles and Responsibilities
Engineering and Design Personnel, Authority & Roles, Responsibility & Lines of
Communication (inc. Design Manage/SR and Discipline Leads, Designers, Reviewers,
Approvers and Document Controller)
 Engineering and Design Competencies and Resource Management
 Remote design coordination and external design services
3 Design Planning and Program Management

Details of the design program and deliverables schedule:
 Design scope for design and construction phase
 Design package register (inc. design reports drawings and other deliverables) and drawing list
 Design resource requirement
 Early Works and Temporary Works Packages
 Design program including timing of design submissions for ARTO review
4 Risk and Opportunity Management

Details of how the risks and opportunities to the design development will be managed including:
 The risk management process
 Risk and opportunity assessment and mitigation
 Risk and opportunity database
 Risk and opportunity communication and reporting
PROCEDURE
5 Design Management Process

Detailed of how the development of the design will be managed including:
 Design Inputs
 Applicable Standards
 Requirements Management (inc. Requirements Analysis and Traceability)
 Design Interfaces (inc. with existing infrastructure, as part of an overall project/program and/or
other projects)
 Thirst Party (inc. ARTO) Design Review and Approvals, Signal Sighting
 Design Development Process inc.
o Constructability Temporary and Stage Design and Occupational Planning (including
Works Readiness Procedure)
o Quality in Design (design checks, reviews, verification, assurance)
o Proof Engineering
o Interdisciplinary Design Check (IDC)
o Safety in Design (SiD)
o Value Engineering
o RAMS and Human Factors Integration
o Sustainability in Design
 Construction Phase Services (inc. Requests For Information, Design Change Requests and
Non Conformance Reports)
 Construction verification (inc. verification and approval of Inspection and Test Plans,
construction phase audits).
6 Configuration Management
Description of the configuration management process to be used during development of the
design including:
 Management of Change
 Type Approval
 Engineering Change
 Waivers
 Management of Design Baselines
 Design Change Control Process (including post IFC changes)
PROCEDURE
7 Interface Management
Details of how organisational interfaces between the teams and individuals used in the
development of the design will be managed including:
 Interfacing organisations to be used to undertake independent reviews
 Interfacing organisations to be used to undertake design of discrete packages
 Interfacing organisations to be used to provide specialist advice or support to the design
 How interfaces to the various stakeholder groups will be managed (for example, regular
progress meetings, workshopping, formal RFI/TQ processes, Works Readiness, optimisation of
occupations)
8 Communication and Reporting

Details of how the status and progress of the design will be reported including:
 Planning and coordination of Management of Change and Engineering Change process
 Design package status and progress including with respect to Works Readiness gates
 Status of Type Approval and Waivers
 RFI status
9 Design Outputs
Details of how the design out puts will be managed including:
 Details of how the design documents will be controlled
 Document handover
 As-builts/As In Service and DMS requirements
 PASS Assets requirements
 Operation and Maintenance Manuals, training, tools and spares
 Information archiving
PROCEDURE
Appendix 6 – Design Report - Typical List of Contents
1 Introduction
Provides an overview of the project and the element of the design to which the design report
applies.
Includes such items as:
 Background of the development undertaken to date (how we arrived at this element of the
design)
 Scope (including geographic and technical boundaries)
 Deliverables forming the design package
 Existing Conditions
 Changes to the design since the previous revision (if applicable)
1.1 Definitions and Abbreviations
Definitions and abbreviations used in the design report
2 Design Criteria
This section forms the criteria around which the design has been developed.
2.1 Design personnel and competency
Details the personnel used in the production of the design package and their supporting
competencies.
2.2 Design Standards
Details all standards referenced in the development and production of the design.
2.3 Functional Requirements
Provides traceability of the design to the core functional requirements. Generally includes a listing
of the requirements applicable to the design together with a description of how the design has met
the requirement. Where the design includes deviations from a requirement this is stated together
with justification and stakeholder agreement for the design change.
May be summarised with further explanation and justification provided in later sections of the
design report.
2.4 Operational Requirements
Provides traceability of the design to the core operational requirements. Generally includes a
listing of the requirements applicable to the design together with a description of how the design
has met the requirement. Where the design includes deviations from a requirement this is stated
together with justification and stakeholder agreement for the design change.
May be summarised with further explanation and justification provided in later sections of the
design report.
PROCEDURE
2.5 Project Inputs

Details all input documentation used, whether provided to the designer or referenced by the
designer in the development of the design.
Such documentation may include:
 Project scoping documentation
 Requirements specifications
 Manufacturer data sheets and manuals
 Other, equivalent designs (including typical or standard drawings)
 Related procedures or processes that may have an impact on the function or operation of the
design
 Client instructions (including technical queries and RFI’s)
2.6 Assumptions
Details any assumptions that have been made during the development of the design.
2.7 Major Constraints
Details any constraints which have affected the design or may affect the implementation of the
design. Particular issues that may have resulted in a design compromise or prevented another
course to be taken should be highlighted.
2.8 Operational Impacts
Will the design result in any impact on the operation of the railway either during or following the
implementation of the changes. This may include:
 The control of the movement of rail services
 Changes to the procedures and processes
2.9 Reliability, Availability and Maintenance
Will the design result in any impact on the reliability or maintainability of the railway either during
or following the implementation of the changes. This may include:
 The ability to safely maintain the infrastructure
 Any identified reduction in the availability or reliability of a piece of infrastructure, system or
subsystem
 Any special instructions or methods that may need to be adopted
3 Description of Design
Details the changes that need to be made to implement the design. This includes:
 Details of any new infrastructure
 Details of all infrastructure that may be removed and/or changed
 Any functional or operational changes (for example, special monitoring or resetting procedures)
PROCEDURE
3.1 Design Methodology

This section provides the main justification for the design development process and is effectively a
storyboard of the design production describing the development of the design package.
This will include any optioneering that may have been undertaken during the production of the
design and also details the process used to reach agreement for the solution adopted (including
stakeholder engagement) together with evidence to support the design decisions made.
Where any special, non-standard or novel design has been used this should be mentioned here.
This section also provides further support to the design where any supplied input documentation
or requirement was unclear or required further development and agreement.
3.2 Design Interfaces
Details organisational interfaces between the teams and individuals used in the development of
the design. This may include:
 Interfacing organisations used to undertake independent reviews
 Interfacing organisations used to undertake design of discrete packages
 Interfacing organisations used to provide specialist advice or support to the design
 How interfaces to the various stakeholder groups have been conducted (for example, regular
progress meetings, workshopping, formal RFI/TQ processes)
3.3 Management of Change
A part of the configuration management process this section includes the following:
 Revision control used to control the design, together with the revision status applicable to the
design package (e.g. preliminary, detailed, final, issued for construction)
 Changes to the design scope or requirements, including the evidence used by the designer to
provide justification for the change (include traceability and evidence of stakeholder
agreement)
This section details both the process used together with specific information related to the change.
3.4 Safety in Design and Human Factors
This section will include details of stakeholder and interdisciplinary engagement through the
design process together with any recommendations made as part of:
 The stakeholder engagement process.
 Dedicated safety in design workshopping
 Human Factors Integration
 Any other workshops or meetings which may have been held to discuss specific risks related to
the design, its implementation and whole-of-life use (operation, maintenance, end-of-life
decommissioning)
PROCEDURE
3.5 Verification
Details the verification undertaken, including justification for the levels of review carried out (for
example, a design may have been reviewed internally but not subject to external peer or proof
review). The design verification process used for the design must be mapped to the appropriate
section of the Rail Safety Act and MTM requirements and supported by project or company
processes.
Full names of the personnel undertaking the verification must also be included.
A complete listing of all error logs and verification reports should also be included.
4 Outstanding Issues
Details any areas of the design, including input documentation, that are still subject to clarification
or agreement. All areas of the design covered by ‘hold clouds’ should also be mentioned here.
4.1 Non-compliance to Standards
Where the design includes aspects that are not compliant or include deviations to standards,
these shall be described here together with details for how the non-conformance has been
addressed.
4.2 Waivers
Includes details of any dispensations or waivers that have been submitted, together with the
status of the application (approved, not approved).
4.3 Type Approval
List of equipment requiring type approval in accordance with MTM Type Approval Procedure (L1-
CHE-PRO-004) and status.
Annexure A - Design Calculations

Design calculations and considerations associated with the design
Annexure B - Equipment List

List of equipment to be used as part of the design including type approval number or pending
status as applicable
Annexure C - Design Review Comments List

Copy of Design Review Comments List (L4-CHE-FOR-046), or equivalent design review
comments sheet provided by the Designer, with status of design comments, review responses
and agreed status.
PROCEDURE
Appendix 7 – Proof Engineering Requirements

In addition to the requirements for design verification, the Contractor shall arrange proof engineering
of the following designs where directed:
 Permanent Structural Works;
 Permanent and Temporary Geotechnical Works; and
 Temporary Structural Works.
Proof engineering shall include a full and independent assessment of all factors influencing the final
integrity of the specified components of the work and shall be undertaken in order to assure
compliance with the Principal’s Project Requirements.
This includes a review of the functional requirements of the permanent works, the detailed design and
documentation of the permanent works and associated temporary works, and the construction
method.
Proof engineering shall be based on the design consultant’s construction drawings and specifications
and without reference to the design consultant’s computations.
Proof engineering shall be undertaken by a proof engineer who is pre-qualified under the Vic Roads
Consultant Pre-qualification Scheme.
The proof engineer shall be independent of any other commitment or obligation to the Contractor or
the Consultant carrying out the design for the Contract.
All advice and comment including calculations provided to the Contractor by the proof engineer shall
be in writing.
A proof engineering report shall be provided for each design package in accordance with the
specifications for Proof Engineering Reports.
Proof Engineering Certificates of Compliance shall be forwarded to the Principal’s Representative not
less than five working days prior to the commencement of construction, fabrication or erection of that
part of the Works. The Certificates of Compliance shall be in a form to the satisfaction of the
Principal’s Representative.
The proof engineer shall stamp and sign all relevant drawing(s) as evidence of the proof engineer’s
detailed check and acceptance prior to the issue of the drawing(s) for construction.
Any amendment to the design after the issue of the Proof Engineering Certificate of Compliance shall
be referred to the proof engineer for review and written confirmation that the Certificate remains valid.
Evidence of this confirmation shall be provided to the Principal’s Representative not less than 24
hours prior to commencement of the relevant works.
Any amendments agreed to by the Principal’s Representative, the design consultant and the proof
engineer shall be incorporated into the final construction drawings and specifications.
PROCEDURE
Proof Engineering Reports
A Proof Engineering Report shall be submitted in respect of each Design Package. The Proof
Engineering Report shall be an independent review report.
The Proof Engineering Reports must be structured in the following format (as a minimum):
a) Introduction;
b) key design inputs provided by the Designer;
c) design assumptions and criteria adopted for proof engineering;
d) key standards used in proof engineering;
e) analytical methodology used in proof engineering;
f) any non-conformances with standards and design brief;
g) Attachment A - Proof Engineering Certificates;
h) Attachment B – Certified Drawings;
i) Attachment C – Relevant Correspondence; and
j) Attachment D – Other Related Information.
PROCEDURE
Appendix 8 – Proof Engineering Certificate of Compliance

(Form to be used by the Proof Engineer at intermediate stages and final completion of design and
construction)
I .................................................................................................................... certify that I have:
(1) undertaken an independent engineering review in relation to the design represented by the
drawings and specifications provided by the Contractor as listed in the attached schedule;
(2) carried out a detailed check of individual structural elements and the structure as a whole
including the specified material properties;
##(strikethrough (3), (4) and/or (5) below if these aspects are not included in the specified scope of
proof engineering):
##:(3) reviewed the Site Conditions Information Report in accordance with AS5100 – Bridge Design,
the appropriate foundation investigation, the recommended design values, material properties and
possible failure mechanisms:
##:(4) reviewed the hydrologic and hydraulic design parameters including design flood discharges
and levels, stream velocities and afflux as well as evaluation of potential for and protection against
scour and bank erosion;
##:(5) reviewed the proposed construction procedure and the aspects of temporary works critical for
structural integrity and safety.
In performing the function of Proof Engineer I have used due skill, care and diligence and from
my review and in my opinion as a professional engineer I consider that:
A. all relevant design actions and design criteria are covered by the design and that these actions
and criteria and overall concept meet the requirements of the Principal’s Project Requirements;
B. the strength, stability and serviceability and other Limit State requirements as defined in the
Principal’s Project Requirements are met; and
C. the construction drawings and specifications accurately describe the following matters critical to
the structural integrity –
##(strikethrough (c) below if these aspects are not included in the specified scope of proof
engineering)
(a) the detailing and dimensions,
(b) the required material properties, and
(c) the construction procedure and temporary works.
Signed
Name
(please print)
On behalf of (Company)
Date
PROCEDURE
Appendix 8 Cont’d
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE – TEMPORARY WORKS INSPECTION
CONTRACTOR’S ENGINEER
I ............................................................................................................................. , the undersigned
am responsible for supervising the construction of temporary works detailed on the following listed
final drawings and specifications certified by the Proof Engineer. Using due skill, care and diligence, I
have reviewed the relevant geometric surveys and test reports and made inspections during the
construction of the temporary works and certify that the completed temporary works complies with the
certified drawings and specifications.
Signed ...................................................................................................................
On behalf of (Company) ...................................................................................................................
Date ....................................................................
DESIGN ENGINEER
I ............................................................................................................................. , the undersigned

am responsible for the design of temporary works detailed on the following listed drawings and
specifications certified by the Proof Engineer. Using due skill, care and diligence, I have made an
inspection of the completed temporary works and certify that it complies with the certified drawings
and specifications.
Signed ...................................................................................................................
On behalf of (Company) ...................................................................................................................
Date ....................................................................
Contractor to schedule all Drawings and Specifications of temporary works certified by the Proof
Engineer, applicable to this joint Certificate of Compliance.

L1 PRJ Pro 009

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

L1 PRJ Pro 009

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

MTM LXRP DESIGN AND TECHNICAL REVIEW

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Date of Issue Version Description

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

3 Relationship to other standards ......................................................................................... 4

5 Terminology and Descriptors ............................................................................................. 5

6 Engineering Review Terms of Reference (ToR) ................................................................ 9

7 Approach and Methodology ............................................................................................. 10

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

3 Relationship to other standards

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

5 Terminology and Descriptors

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Judgement of JoS is an assessment of the technical risk introduced by the

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Preliminary Preliminary Requirements Review assesses whether the User

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

6 Engineering Review Terms of Reference (ToR)

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Judgement of Significance (JoS)

7 Approach and Methodology

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

8.1 MTM Projects and Planning

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

8.2 The Designer

a) Design and Engineering Management Plan

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

b) Drawing Management Plan

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

c) Design Drawing Register

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

e) Third Party Reviews

8.3 MTM Engineering

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

 Checking Engineering Change (EC) is submitted by Projects and Planning to cover

8.4 MTM Asset Management

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

8.5 MTM Infrastructure Delivery

Appendix 1 – LXRP Design and Technical Review Flow Chart

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Appendix 2 – Engineering Design Review Comments Sheet

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Appendix 3 – Engineering Design Review Checklists

- Stakeholder Requirements Assessment (SRA) Checklist, L4-CHE-FOR-029. Use for

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

Appendix 4 – Engineering Design Artefacts List

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

1.4 Final Design

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

2.3 Detailed Design

3 Signalling and Communications

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

3.1 Options and Concepts

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

iv) CBI Application Data Logic Structure Manual;

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

3.3 Detailed Design

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

ii) Local Cable Containment Route including:

L1-PRJ-PRO-009 Version: 1 Effective from: 15th April 2016

4 Overhead Wiring (OHW)