Verification of Onshore Pipelines

Transcription

1 DNV SERVICE SPECIFICATION DNV-DSS-316 Verification of Onshore Pipelines DECEMBER 2013 The electronic pdf version of this document found through is the officially binding version

2 FOREWORD DNV is a global provider of knowledge for managing risk. Today, safe and responsible business conduct is both a license to operate and a competitive advantage. Our core competence is to identify, assess, and advise on risk management. From our leading position in certification, classification, verification, and training, we develop and apply standards and best practices. This helps our customers safely and responsibly improve their business performance. DNV is an independent organisation with dedicated risk professionals in more than 100 countries, with the purpose of safeguarding life, property and the environment. DNV service documents consist of among others the following types of documents: Service Specifications. Procedural requirements. Standards. Technical requirements. Recommended Practices. Guidance. The Standards and Recommended Practices are offered within the following areas: A) Qualification, Quality and Safety Methodology B) Materials Technology C) Structures D) Systems E) Special Facilities F) Pipelines and Risers G) Asset Operation H) Marine Operations J) Cleaner Energy O) Subsea Systems U) Unconventional Oil & Gas Det Norske Veritas AS December 2013 Any comments may be sent by to rules@dnv.com This service document has been prepared based on available knowledge, technology and/or information at the time of issuance of this document, and is believed to reflect the best of contemporary technology. The use of this document by others than DNV is at the user's sole risk. DNV does not accept any liability or responsibility for loss or damages resulting from any use of this document.

3 CHANGES CURRENT Page 3 CHANGES CURRENT General This is a new document.

4 Contents Page 4 CONTENTS CHANGES CURRENT... 3 Sec. 1 Introduction General Introduction Objectives Verification service Structure of this document Definitions Verbal forms Definitions Abbreviations References General... 9 Sec. 2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification General Objectives Verification principles Purpose of verification Verification as a complementary activity Verification management Risk-differentiated levels of verification involvement Selection of level of verification involvement Selection factors Overall safety objective Risk assessment Technical innovation and contractor experience Quality management systems Defining a verification plan / scope of work Risk based verification planning Information flow Communication lines Obligations Notification of verification level involvement Sec. 3 Verification activities General Objectives Scope of work Project phases General principles Project initiation Verification during conceptual design Project realisation General Verification of overall project management Verification during design Verification during construction...18 Sec. 4 Verification Service requirements General Objectives Scope of work Verification service documents General DNV Statement of conformity Verification report Intermediate documents Verification comments Audit report...23

5 Contents Page Visit reports Use of quality management systems General Quality plans Inspection and test plans Review of quality management system...24 App. A Guideline on selection of verification involvement level based on simplified verification planning A.1 General A.2 Trigger questions App. B Examples of verification documents B.1 General App. C Detailed scope of work tables for verification C.1 General C.2 Description of terms used in the scope of work tables C.3 Overall project management C.4 Design C.5 Construction C.6 Operations C.7 Environmental impacts C.8 Third party safety impact assessment... 56

6 Sec.1 Introduction Page 6 1 General 1.1 Introduction SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION This DNV Service Specification (DNV-DSS-316) provides criteria for and guidance on verification of complete onshore pipeline systems and verification of the integrity of parts or phases of an onshore pipeline system This DSS does not provide a DNV certification scheme for onshore pipeline systems. Guidance note: Statutory certification of onshore pipeline systems to the requirements of Regulatory Authorities is not included specifically in the scope of application of this DSS. Such certification scheme shall be governed by the regulations of the appointing authorities. Hence the appointing authorities should define the statutory certification scheme. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e This DSS falls under the top level document DNV-OSS-300 Risk Based Verification and applies riskdifferentiated levels of verification involvement This DSS identifies and describes verification activities for an onshore pipeline system during design, construction (fabrication and installation) and operation The identified and described verification activities in this DSS are generic. Based on the scope of work tables in Sec.3, the detailed verification scope of work tables in App.C should be subject to project specific requirements tailoring based on risk assessments. 1.2 Objectives The objectives of this document are to: describe DNV s verification services for onshore pipeline systems, provide guidance for Customers and other parties for the selection of the level of DNV s involvement in the verification, provide a common communication platform for describing extent of verification activities. 1.3 Verification service This DNV Service Specification (DSS) applies to verification during the design, construction and operation of onshore pipeline systems This DSS describes the principle of a DNV levelled verification involvement, which easily can be used in communications about the extent and scope of verification activities The primary scope of the verification work is to confirm that the design, construction, operation and environmental impact of the onshore pipeline systems complies with the specified requirements. Other aspects, such as verification of flow assurance, may be included in DNV s scope of work, if desired by the Customer This principle of levelled verification involvement applies both to internal company verification or owners behalf as well as any obligations of licensees for independent verification where this is applicable. 1.4 Structure of this document This document consist of four sections and three appendices: Section 1 gives the general scope of the document, definitions and references. Section 2 describes the principles of verification based on risk differentiated levels of verification involvement, how to define the level of verification involvement, and how to develop a verification plan/scope of work for a particular project. Section 3 describes generic verification activities for each of the project phases. Section 4 describes the verification service; scope of work definition and documents issued by DNV as a result of the verification service process. Appendix A poses trigger questions for the selection of level of verification involvement. Appendix B gives examples of DNV verification service documents. Appendix C gives detailed scope of work tables for all project phases and all levels of verification involvement. These tables are generic and the basis for the development of project specific scope of work tables.

7 Sec.1 Introduction Page 7 2 Definitions 2.1 Verbal forms Shall : verbal form used to indicate requirements strictly to be followed in order to conform to the document Should : verbal form used to indicate that among several possibilities one is recommended as particularly suitable, without mentioning or excluding others, or that a certain course of action is preferred but not necessarily required May : verbal form used to indicate a course of action permissible within the limits of the document. 2.2 Definitions Customer: DNV s contractual partner. It may be the Purchaser, the Owner or the Contractor Onshore pipeline system: Buried and/or above ground pipeline including those sections laid in or across inland lakes or water courses. The demarcation between onshore and offshore normally is laying at the average high water mark. In this document, onshore pipeline system is also referred as pipeline system. Guidance note: The definition of the onshore pipeline system may also be dependent on National Regulation definitions. Where project or other standards use other terms, these can be used provided they are well defined and agreed. Verification of pressure regulating, metering, compressor and pumping stations is not part of the scope for this DSS. In case such stations are part of the pipeline system they have to be considered and some guidance can be found in DNV-OSS-307 Process Facilities, DNV-DSS-314 Verification of Hydrocarbon Refining and Petrochemical Facilities and DNV-DSS-315 Verification of Onshore LNG and Gas Facilities. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e Design: All related engineering to design the pipeline including both structural as well as material, corrosion and construction Design phase: An initial pipeline phase that takes a systematic approach to the production of specifications, drawings and other documents to ensure that the onshore pipeline meets specified requirements (including design reviews to ensure that design output is verified against design input requirements) Construction phase: The construction phase will typically include manufacture, fabrication and installation activities. Manufacture activities will typically include manufacture of linepipe and corrosion protection and weight coating. Fabrication activities will typically include fabrication of pipeline components and assemblies. Installation activities will typically include preparation of pipeline route, transportation, welding, laying, tie-in, pressure testing and commissioning Operations phase: The phase when the pipeline is being used for the purpose for which it was designed Hazard: A deviation (departure from the design and operating intention) which could cause damage, injury or other form of loss (Chemical Industries Association HAZOP Guide) HAZOP (HAZard and OPerability study): The application of a formal systematic critical examination to the process and engineering intentions of new or existing facilities to assess the hazard potential of maloperation or mal-function of individual items of equipment and their consequential effects on the facility as a whole (Chemical Industries Association HAZOP Guide) HAZID (HAZard IDentification): A technique for the identification of all significant hazards associated with the particular activity under consideration. (ISO-17776) Risk: The qualitative or quantitative likelihood of an accident or unplanned event occurring, considered in conjunction with the potential consequences of such a failure. In quantitative terms, risk is the quantified probability of a defined failure mode times its quantified consequence Risk Reduction Measures: Those measures taken to reduce the risks to the operation of the pipeline system and to the environment, health and safety of personnel associated with it or in its vicinity by: Reduction in the probability of failure. Mitigation of the consequences of failure. Guidance note: The usual order of preference of risk reduction measures is: a) Inherent Safety b) Prevention c) Detection

8 Sec.1 Introduction Page 8 d) Control e) Mitigation f) Emergency Response ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e Safety Objectives: The safety goals for the construction, operation and decommissioning of the pipeline including acceptance criteria for the level of risk acceptable to the Customer Verification (ISO 9000:2005): Confirmation, through the provision of objective evidence, that specified requirements have been fulfilled. Guidance note: The term verified is used to designate the corresponding status. Verification can comprise activities such as: performing alternative or additional calculations comparing a new design specification with a similar proven design specification undertaking validation tests reviewing documents. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e Verification service: The verification service includes, in addition to performing verification, the issuing of a deliverable DNV document in which the conclusion of the verification activity is stated. Guidance note: The scope of work shall be agreed, and described in a contract, between DNV and the customer. The scope of work may be described by reference to an object specific DNV service specification or technical standards specified by customer. In the case of an object specific DNV service specification forming the basis for verification scope definition, any deviation or amendment to the scope of work outlined in the DNV service specification shall be addressed in the contract. The deliverables shall be agreed in the contract. The type of DNV document(s) that may be issued depends on the extent and nature of the verification scope of work. 2.3 Abbreviations ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e--- 3PSIA 3 rd Party Safety Impact Assessment AUT Automated Ultrasonic Testing BV Block Valve CP Cathodic Protection DNV Det Norske Veritas DSS DNV Service Specification ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment FEED Front End Engineering Design FMEA Failure Mode Effect Analysis HDD Horizontal Direct Drilling HFI High Frequency Induction (welding) IM Installation Manual ITT Invitation to Tender MPQT Manufacturing Procedure Qualification Test MPS Manufacturing Procedure Specification MT Magnetic Particle Testing NDT Non-Destructive Testing PT Penetrant Testing QRA Quantitative Risk Analysis RT Radiographic Testing SAWL Submerged Arc-Welding Longitudinal SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition UT Ultrasonic Testing WPAR Welding Procedure Approval Record WPS Welding Procedure Specification

9 Sec.1 Introduction Page 9 3 References 3.1 General A Guide to Hazard and Operability Studies, 1979, Chemical Industries Association Limited, London ISO 9000:2005: Quality management systems Fundamentals and vocabulary, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva ISO 9001:2008: Quality management systems Requirements, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva ISO 17000:2004: Conformity Assessment Vocabulary and general principles, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.BS 4778 Quality Vocabulary, Part 2 Quality Concepts and Related Definitions, 1991, British Standards Institute, London EN General Criteria for Certification Bodies Operating Product Certification, 1998, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels DNV-RP-A203, Technology Qualification, July DNV-OSS-300, Risk Based Verification, April DNV-OSS-307, Process Facilities, April DNV-DSS-314, Verification of Hydrocarbon Refining and Petrochemical Facilities. April DNV-DSS-315, Verification of Onshore LNG and Gas Facilities, April DNV-RP-J202, Design and Operation of CO2 pipelines, April 2010.

10 Sec.2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification Page 10 SECTION 2 PRINCIPLES OF RISK-DIFFERENTIATED VERIFICATION 1 General 1.1 Objectives The objectives of this section are to provide: an introduction to the principles of verification of pipeline systems an introduction to the principles of risk differentiated levels of verification involvement guidance on the selection of levels of verification involvement. 2 Verification principles 2.1 Purpose of verification Verification constitutes a systematic and independent examination of the various phases in the life of a pipeline system to determine whether it fulfills the specified requirements Verification activities are expected to identify errors or failures in the work associated with the pipeline system and to contribute to reducing the risks associated with the operation of the pipeline system, to the environment and to the health and safety of personnel associated with it or in its vicinity Verification is primarily focused on integrity, environmental impact and (human) safety, but business risk (cost and schedule) may be addressed, if required by the Customer. 2.2 Verification as a complementary activity Verification shall be complementary to routine design, construction and operations activities and not a substitute for them. Therefore, although verification will take into account the work, and the quality assurance and quality control of that work, carried out by the Customer and its contractors, it is inevitable that verification will duplicate some work that has been carried out previously by other parties involved in the pipeline system Verification plans should be developed and implemented in such a way as to minimise additional work, and cost, but to maximise its effectiveness. This development of verification plans shall depend on the findings from the examination of quality management systems, the examination of documents and the examination of production activities. 2.3 Verification management The verification philosophy and verification methods used shall be described to confirm satisfactory completion of the verification activities The verification methods shall ensure that verification: has a consistent and constructive approach to the satisfactory completion and operation of the pipeline system is available worldwide wherever the Customer or his contractors operate uses up-to-date methods, tools and procedures uses qualified and experienced personnel All verification activities shall be carried out by competent personnel. Competence includes having the necessary theoretical and practical knowledge and experience of the activity being examined. An adequate verification of some activities may require access to specialised technical knowledge As well as demonstrating competence of individuals, the verification organisation shall be able to show competence and experience in pipeline verification. 2.4 Risk-differentiated levels of verification involvement The approach of risk-differentiated levels of verification involvement shall be applied to the definition of verification plan/scope of work, as outlined in the general risk based verification service overview in DNV- OSS The level of verification involvement is differentiated according to the risk associated with the pipeline system. If the risk associated with the pipeline system is higher, the level of verification involvement is higher. Conversely, if the risk associated with the pipeline is lower, the level of verification activities can be reduced, without any reduction in their effectiveness.

11 Sec.2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification Page Verification involvement of pipeline systems is categorised into Low, Medium and High. A summary of the levels of involvement is given in Table 2-1. Medium is the customary level of verification involvement and is applied to the majority of pipelines. High is the level of verification involvement applied where the risks associated with the pipeline are higher because, for example, it has highly corrosive contents, it is in adverse environmental conditions, it is technically innovative or the contractors are not well experienced in the design and construction of similar pipelines. Low is the level of verification involvement applied where the risks associated with the pipeline are lower because, for example, it has benign contents, it is located in congenial environmental conditions, or the contractors are well experienced in the design and construction of similar pipelines. Table 2-1 Summary of Verification Involvement and guidance for their applicability project phase Description of involvement Guidance for application on the level of involvement Low Review of general principles and production systems during design and construction. Review of principal design documents, construction procedures and qualification (e.g. Manufacturing Procedure Qualification Test - MPQT) reports. Visit-based attendance during system testing and start-up activities. Less comprehensive involvement than level Medium. Proven pipeline designs with benign contents and/ or installed in benign environmental conditions. Straightforward pipelines designed and constructed by experienced contractors. Low consequences of failure from a safety, environmental or commercial point of view. Relaxed to normal completion schedule Medium High Review of general principles and production systems during design and construction. Detailed review of principal and other selected design documents with support of simplified independent analyses. Full time attendance during (procedure) qualification (e.g. MPQT) and review of the resulting reports. Visit-based or intermittent presence at site. Review of general principles and production systems during design and construction. Detailed review of most design documents with support of simplified and advanced independent analyses. Full time attendance during (procedure) qualification (e.g. MPQT) and review of the resulting reports. Full time presence at site for most activities. More comprehensive involvement than level Medium The selection of level of verification involvement shall be based on a risk based verification planning process. The selection of the most suitable verification involvement level may be guided by using the questions proposed in App.A The basis for the selection of level of verification involvement shall be documented Different levels of verification involvement can be chosen for different phases of the pipeline system, or even parts of the pipeline system within the same phase. Guidance note: For example, pipeline design may be innovative and considered high risk whereas the construction method is well known and considered low risk. The converse might also be the case. Additionally, linepipe production from a well-known mill may be considered low risk, whereas, production from an unknown mill may be considered high risk. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e--- Pipelines in moderate environmental conditions [conditions that introduce moderate risks associated with the pipeline (e.g. unstable slopes)]. Pipeline introduces risks associated with moderately environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. water crossings). Projects with a moderate degree of novelty. Medium consequences of failure from a safety, environmental or commercial point of view. Normal completion schedule. Innovative pipeline designs in extreme or sensitive environmental conditions. Projects with a high degree of novelty or large leaps in technology. Inexperienced contractors or exceptionally tight completion schedule. Very high consequences of failure from a safety, environmental or commercial point of view The level of verification involvement can be reduced or increased during a phase if the originally chosen level is considered too rigorous or too lenient, as new information on the risks associated with the pipeline system becomes available.

12 Sec.2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification Page 12 3 Selection of level of verification involvement 3.1 Selection factors The selection of the level of verification involvement shall depend on the criticality of each of the elements that have an impact on the management of hazards and associated risk levels of the pipeline system. This is illustrated by Figure 2-1. The contribution of each element should be judged qualitatively and/or quantitatively and shall use, where possible, quantified risk assessment data to provide a justifiable basis for any decisions made Selection factors are the: overall safety objectives for the pipeline system assessment of the risks associated with the pipeline and the measures taken to reduce these risks degree of technical innovation in the pipeline system experience of the contractors in carrying out similar work quality management systems of the owner and his contractors. Probability of Failure Low High LOW MEDIUM Increasing Risk HIGH Low High Consequence of Failure Figure 2-1 Selection of the Required of Verification Involvement 3.2 Overall safety objective An overall safety objective covering all phases of the pipeline system from design to operation should be defined by the Customer. The safety objective should address the main safety goals as well as establishing acceptance criteria for the level of risk acceptable to the Customer. Depending on the pipeline and its location the risk could be measured in terms of human injuries as well as environmental, political and economic consequences. 3.3 Risk assessment A systematic review shall be carried out to identify and evaluate the probabilities and consequences of failures in the pipeline system. The extent of the review shall reflect the criticality of the pipeline system, the planned operation and previous experience with similar pipeline systems. This review shall identify the risk associated with the operation of the pipeline system and to the environment, health and safety of personnel associated with it or in its vicinity Once the risks have been identified their extent can be reduced to a level as low as reasonably practicable by means of one or both of: reduction in the probability of failure mitigation of the consequences of failure. Guidance note: The term as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) has come into use through the United Kingdom s The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act Reasonable Practicability is not defined in the Act but has acquired meaning by interpretations in the courts. It has been interpreted to mean that the degree of risk from any particular activity can be balanced against the cost, time and trouble of the measures to be taken to reduce the risk. It follows, therefore, that the greater the risk the more reasonable it would be to incur substantial cost, time and effort in reducing that risk. Similarly, if the risk was very small it would not be reasonable to expect great expense or effort to be incurred in reducing it. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e---

13 Sec.2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification Page The result of the systematic review of these risks is measured against the safety objectives and used in the selection of the appropriate verification involvement level. 3.4 Technical innovation and contractor experience The degree of technical innovation in the pipeline system shall be considered. Risks associated with the pipeline are likely to be greater for a pipeline with a high degree of technical innovation than with a pipeline designed, manufactured and installed to well-accepted criteria in well-understood environmental conditions Similarly, the degree of risk associated with the pipeline system should be considered where contractors are inexperienced or the work schedule is tight Factors to be considered in the selection of the appropriate verification involvement level include: degree of difficulty in achieving technical requirements knowledge of similar pipelines knowledge of contractors general pipeline experience knowledge of contractors experience in similar work. 3.5 Quality management systems Adequate quality management systems shall be implemented to ensure that gross errors in the work for pipeline system design, construction and operations are limited Factors to be considered when evaluating the adequacy of the quality management system include: whether or not an ISO 9001 or equivalent certified system is in place results from external audits results from internal audits experience with contractors previous work project work-force familiarity with the quality management system, e.g. has there been a rapid expansion of the work force or are all parties of a joint venture familiar with the same system. Guidance note: Most organisations have quality management systems certified by an accredited certification body. However, when business increases, they expand their staff quickly by taking on contract personnel often for a fixed period or for the duration of a particular contract. This influx of new personnel can lead to problems of control of both the whole organisation and of particular projects being undertaken. Quality problems may then occur, as these new personnel have no detailed knowledge of the organisation s business methods, its ethos or its working procedures. New organisations may experience quality problems for similar reasons. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e--- 4 Defining a verification plan / scope of work 4.1 Risk based verification planning Based on the pipeline system specifications, the risk assessment and the selection of level of verification involvement, a verification plan shall be developed The verification plan is the scope of work for DNV s verification. It should be re-visited, re-evaluated and revised if required as the project progresses and new information becomes available Generic scopes of work for verification at the three levels of verification involvement, Low (L), Medium (M) and High (H), are given in the tables in Sec Typical detailed scope of work descriptions, which are based on the generic scopes of work and which show the activities to be verified, are given in App.C A specific scope of work description shall be made for each particular project, and shall be included in the final DNV verification report. 5 Information flow 5.1 Communication lines Communication lines are illustrated in Figure 2-2. Which lines that are open for communication depend on the particular contractual agreements.

14 Sec.2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification Page For instances where DNV does not have a contract with the Owner, DNV recommends strongly that the Owner, through his contract with the Designer/Constructor, secures a direct communication line from DNV to Owner and vice versa. Guidance note: The recommendation comes from DNV s experience with projects where communications difficulties between the parties have jeopardised the issue of the pipeline verification statement. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e--- Owner/ operator Designer/ constructor DNV Figure 2-2 Communication Lines 5.2 Obligations In order to achieve the purpose and benefits of verification the involved parties shall be mutually obliged to share and act upon all relevant information pertaining to the verification scope The Customer shall be obliged to: inform DNV about the basis for selecting the level of verification involvement and the investigations and assumptions made in this context give DNV full access to all information concerning the verification scope for the pipeline system and ensure that clauses to this effect are included in contracts for parties acting on behalf of the Customer and parties providing products, processes and services covered by the verification scope ensure that DNV is involved in the handling of deviations from specified requirements within the verification scope act upon information provided by DNV with respect to events or circumstances that may jeopardise the pipeline system and/or the purpose and benefit of verification ensure that the Safety Objective established for the pipeline project is known and pursued by parties acting on behalf of the Customer and parties providing products, processes and services covered by the verification scope The Customer shall further be obliged to ensure that the designer and/or contractor: perform their assigned tasks in accordance with the safety objectives established for the pipeline project provide the Owner and DNV with all relevant information pertaining to the verification scope DNV shall be obliged to: inform the Customer if, in the opinion of DNV, the basis for selecting the level of verification involvement or the assumptions made in this respect are found to be in error or assessed incorrectly inform the Customer of events or circumstances that, in the opinion of DNV, may jeopardise the pipeline system and/or the purpose and benefit of verification effectively perform all verification work and adjust the level of verification involvement according to the actual performance of parties providing products, processes and services covered by the verification scope. 5.3 Notification of verification level involvement An assessment of the required level of verification involvement for a project should be made by the Owner before preparing tender documents for design and construction activities. The Owner can then specify this level in the Invitations to Tender. This will give Contractors clear guidance and reference when estimating the extent and cost of efforts associated with verification activities.

15 Sec.2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification Page The required level of verification involvement may be assessed by the Owner using this DSS. However, if the Owner requires the Contractor to carry out this assessment as part of his response to an Invitation to Tender (ITT) the Owner should provide the necessary information to enable the Contractor to carry out this work. This information should include overall safety objectives for the pipeline system as well as particulars, such as temperatures, pressures, fluid contents and environmental criteria, commonly contained in a design brief. Guidance note: Frequently ITTs contain the statement. the Contractor shall arrange 3rd party verification. The use of the information contained in the above paragraphs should assist the Owner to specify the required level of verification involvement more precisely. On other occasions, verification is arranged by the Owner but, in this case, it is important that Contractors are informed of the level of verification involvement planned. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e---

16 Sec.3 Verification activities Page 16 1 General 1.1 Objectives The objectives of this section are to provide: SECTION 3 VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES an overview of verification activities relating to onshore pipeline systems generic scope of work tables for verification at the three levels of verification involvement, Low (L), Medium (M) and High (H). 1.2 Scope of work The process of defining a verification plan with a scope of work is described in Sec.2 [4]. Responsibilities and requirements to the definition of the verification plan is addressed in Sec.1 [1.3] for verification service The verification activities described in the scope of work tables are generic. Their relative risk rating, represented by the type of involvement at the different verification involvement levels, is based on experience and does not take into account the specifics or differences between sweet and sour gas, etc. 2 Project phases 2.1 General principles DNV s verification of pipeline systems is normally based on distinct project phases and the recognition of key milestones The verification process may follow the project phases: Project initiation: conceptual design basic design/ Front End Engineering Design (FEED) Project realisation: detail design construction: manufacturing of linepipe manufacturing and fabrication of onshore pipeline components and assemblies manufacturing of corrosion protection and coating installation (lower and lay) project completion pre-commissioning commissioning. operations. Guidance note: Appendix C includes some generic descriptions of typical sub-phases. This may be used as guidance when agreeing the content or completeness of a sub-phase. Where projects or other standards use other terms, these can be used provided they are well defined and agreed 3 Project initiation 3.1 Verification during conceptual design ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e Verification during the conceptual and/or feasibility studies of a project is optional. However, verification of the early stages of a project can be beneficial for verification during the design and construction phases It is advisable to combine the design verification during conceptual design with additional review of: environmental aspects project schedule project cost.

17 Sec.3 Verification activities Page 17 4 Project realisation 4.1 General All design and construction aspects relevant to pipeline safety and integrity may be covered by the verification service. During design the specifications (requirements) are developed, while the construction procedures describe how the requirements will be satisfied and implemented during construction. 4.2 Verification of overall project management Verification of the overall project management is the examination of the means of controlling the pipeline project This verification is to confirm that the necessary controls are in place to ensure information flows across the various interfaces. This is especially important where separate contractors have been employed for different phases of the project such as design and construction Typically the documentation is expected to be in line with ISO 9001 requirements Definition of scope of work for verification of overall project management should follow Table 3-1. Table 3-1 Scope of work for verification of overall project management Verification activity L M H Review of the project management process by: review of project quality management documentation x x x audit/attend Customer s audit of project quality management system x review of sub-contractor control x review of interface controls x review of methods of information flow x 4.3 Verification during design Design verification is the examination of the assumptions, methods and results of the design process and is performed at the specified level of verification involvement to confirm that the specified requirements of the pipeline system will be achieved Design verification shall consist of one, or more, of: reviewing the design process reviewing specifications for design reviewing design reports and drawings performing independent parallel calculations reviewing specifications for construction and operation, resulting from design Definition of scope of work for verification of design should follow Table 3-2. Table 3-2 Scope of work for verification of design Verification activity L M H Review of the design process by review of design quality management documentation x x x audit/attend Customer s audit of design quality management system x Review of Design Premises / Basis by review of the design basis with emphasis of the survey results, ESIA and 3PSI assessment data. Evaluation of the design criteria x x x Pipeline route and environmental conditions 1) x x x Review of design reports and drawings by 2) review of the main onshore pipeline documentation to confirm that the main load conditions have been accounted for in design, that the governing conditions are x x x identified, and that the chosen design philosophies are in accordance with specified codes and standards evaluation of the main methods used and spot checks of the input data and the calculation results x x detail review of main design reports x

18 Sec.3 Verification activities Page 18 Table 3-2 Scope of work for verification of design (Continued) Verification activity L M H Performing independent parallel calculations by check of pressure containment x x x simplified independent analysis/calculation(s) performed by spot checks x x advanced independent analysis/calculation(s) performed by spot checks x Review of specifications for construction and operation by spot check of critical aspects x x x hot tapping, vents and flares x x x review of main specifications x x thorough review of main specifications x Review of flow assurance (non-integrity aspects 3) ) general principles x x x review of main documents supported by simplified analyses x x 1) Verification activity to be agreed between Customer and DNV case by case considering aspects as: general knowledge of the area criticality of the results. 2) If the pipeline system is designed for different pressures along the pipeline (segmented design) this should be reflected in the verification scope of work regarding flow assurance, in addition to wall thickness, safety systems, etc. 3) These are optional verification services. Guidance note: Design verification activities may be split between Basic Design (sometimes called FEED, and which may performed as a part of the Project Initiation phase) and Detailed Design, or other sub-phase, depending on type of contract. 4.4 Verification during construction ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e Verification during construction shall be carried out by means of full time attendance, audits, inspection or spot checks of the work, as appropriate, in sufficient detail to confirm that the specified requirements of the onshore pipeline system will be achieved During construction verification shall consist of one, or more, of: reviewing the construction process reviewing construction procedures reviewing qualification process surveillance during construction activities reviewing final documentation Definition of scope of work for verification of construction should follow Table 3-3 and Table 3-4 for manufacturing and fabrication, Table 3-5 for installation and Table 3-6 for final testing and completion. Table 3-3 Scope of work for verification of manufacturing and fabrication of linepipe and other pressure containing components Verification activity L M H Review of the manufacturing & fabrication process Review of manufacturing and fabrication management systems x x x Audit/attend Customer s audit of the quality management system x Review of manufacturing & fabrication procedures Review manufacturing, fabrication and inspection procedures for confirmation of compliance with the manufacturing specification x x x Review method statements x x Review of qualification process Review the Manufacturing Procedure Specification, (MPS), Manufacturing Procedure Qualification Test (MPQT), if applicable x x x Full time attendance during MPQT, if applicable, or first day production x x Surveillance during manufacturing and fabrication activities

19 Sec.3 Verification activities Page 19 Table 3-3 Scope of work for verification of manufacturing and fabrication of linepipe and other pressure containing components (Continued) Verification activity L M H Visit-based attendance during testing, to confirm, based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced in accordance with the manufacturing x x x specification Visit-based or full-time attendance during manufacturing and fabrication to confirm, based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced in accordance x x with the manufacturing specification Full-time attendance during manufacturing and fabrication to confirm, based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced in accordance with the x manufacturing specification for linepipe production only: overall independent verification of production by DNV x Review of final documentation x x x Guidance note: Linepipe and other materials may be ordered with certificates (e.g. 3.2 according to EN 10204). This can be integrated in the overall verification activities, so as not to duplicate work. ---e-n-d---of---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e--- Table 3-4 Scope of work for verification of manufacturing and fabrication of coatings and other nonpressure containing components Verification activity L M H Review of the manufacturing & fabrication process Review of manufacturing and fabrication management systems x x x Audit/attend Customer s audit of the quality management system x Review of manufacturing & fabrication procedures Review manufacturing, fabrication and inspection procedures for confirmation of compliance with the manufacturing specification x x Review of qualification process Review the Manufacturing Procedure Specification, (MPS), Manufacturing Procedure Qualification Test (MPQT), if applicable x x x Full time attendance during MPQT, if applicable, or first day production x Surveillance during manufacturing and fabrication activities Visit-based attendance during testing, to confirm, based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced in accordance with the manufacturing specification x x Visit-based attendance during manufacturing and fabrication to confirm, based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced in accordance with the manufacturing specification x Review of final documentation x x x Table 3-5 Scope of work for verification of installation Verification activity L M H Review of the installation process Review of installation management systems x x x Audit/attend Customer s audit of the quality management system x Review of installation procedures Spot check of Installation Manual, (IM) x x x Critical evaluation of the Risk Register for the pipeline (the Risk Register should contain all the threads to the onshore pipeline system) x x Review of qualification process For critical operations, review the qualification of the IM x x x Full time attendance during qualification tests, if applicable, or production start-up x x

20 Sec.3 Verification activities Page 20 Table 3-5 Scope of work for verification of installation (Continued) Verification activity L M H Surveillance during installation activities Visit-based attendance during start-up of construction activities (i.e. pipelaying, water crossings, CP installation, Block valve (BV) intervention works, Horizontal x x x Directional Drilling (HDD) etc.) Full time attendance during qualification tests: visit- based attendance during construction x x Full time attendance during construction (i.e. pipelaying, water crossings, HDD, CP and BV installation, intervention works x Review of final documentation x x x Table 3-6 Scope of work for verification of final testing for operation, including as-built survey and project completion Verification activity L M H Review of the process Review of management systems x x x Audit/attend Customer s audit of the quality management system x Review of procedures Review of procedures to confirm that the test procedures will test the onshore pipeline system in accordance with the design requirements: System pressure test, CP system x x x and BV commissioning Surveillance during testing and completion activities Full time attendance during pressure testing (min 24hrs). Visit based attendance during CP and BV commissioning x x x Full time attendance during all pre-commissioning testings and audit based attendance during cleaning, gauging, de-watering and drying. Visit-based attendance x during as-built surveying Review of final documentation Spot check of as-built documentation x x x Review of as-built documentation x

21 Sec.4 Verification Service requirements Page 21 1 General 1.1 Objectives SECTION 4 VERIFICATION SERVICE REQUIREMENTS The objectives of this section are to provide: details of DNV s verification services for onshore pipeline systems details of DNV s deliverables for verification service for onshore pipeline systems. 1.2 Scope of work The verification service is described in Sec.1 [1.3] The scope of work is determined by and shall be described in a contract between DNV and the customer Sec.2 [4] describes the process of defining a risk-differentiated verification plan / scope of work. The customer may stipulate the level of verification involvement. 2 Verification service documents 2.1 General The type of DNV documents that may be issued depends on the extent and nature of the verification scope of work DNV may issue verification service deliverables during the execution of the verification scope, and at its completion. The purpose of the deliverables is to document the scope of work performed, and the conclusions reached, by DNV. The verification documents are as follows and the hierarchy is shown in Figure 4-1 below: Statement of Conformity Verification Report Intermediate documents: Audit reports Verification Comments Visit reports. Statement of Conformity with accompanying verification report Verification Report Figure 4-1 Document Hierarchy for Verification Intermediate documents Verification documents are, in principle, documents confirming that an examination has been carried out, and are valid only at the date of issue. 2.2 DNV Statement of conformity A Statement of Conformity may be issued by DNV as a statement confirming that verification of documents and/or activities has concluded that the pipeline system complies with specified requirements. In order for DNV to issue a Statement of Conformity the following requirements apply: the scope shall cover the complete pipeline system or a major self-contained part of it. Major self-contained

22 Sec.4 Verification Service requirements Page 22 part shall mean a complete system, or the integration of more systems, to which risk based verification is or may be applied DNV shall have accepted the level of verification involvement to be satisfactory in relation to the risks associated with the pipeline system or self-contained part of it it may be issued upon completion of the total verification scope, or at completion of logical phases, e.g. design or construction there shall not be omissions in the verification scope which may lead to misinterpretation of the Statement of Con-formity, e.g. in the design verification scope aspects like safety or structural integrity may not be omitted from individual components or systems there shall be no unresolved deviations, i.e. no open verification comments, which inherently infringe the integrity of the pipeline system the statement is valid on the date of issue Alternatives to detailed requirements/solutions in the verification reference may be acceptable when the overall integrity, safety and reliability level is documented and, in DNV s interpretation, found to be equivalent or better than that of the verification reference. This principle of equivalence does not apply to verification against non-dnv reference documents The Statement of Conformity shall be supported by a Verification Report, which shall be referenced from the Statement of Conformity. 2.3 Verification report A Verification Report may be issued by DNV as a statement confirming the conclusion of the verification process. A Verification Report may in principle be issued at any stage of the verification process A Verification Report may be issued in conjunction with a Statement of Conformity A Verification Report may be in the form of a close-out report covering the completion of a selfcontained part of the verification of a pipeline system A Verification Report may be the final deliverable if the requirements to a Statement of Conformity are not fulfilled or a Statement of Conformity is not required Deviations from requirements shall be highlighted in the Verification Report. In the summary and/or in the introduction, it shall be stated if there are unresolved deviations, with a reference to where in the report they are addressed in detail. Deviations that are addressed through alternative solutions shall be included in the list. Such solutions may imply e.g. operational limitations In summary, thus, the Verification Report shall include: reference to the contract under which the work has been carried out product or service description and item number, if relevant application (operational limitations and conditions of use) for which the product is intended verification scope of work, including level of verification involvement, if applicable codes and Standards which the product or service has been verified against clear statement of the conclusion from the verification (does it or does it not meet the specified requirements) list of documentation on which the verification report is based (reports, drawings, correspondence etc.) unresolved deviations/non-conformities (open comments). 2.4 Intermediate documents DNV may issue intermediate documentation of progress or conclusion related to individual verification elements: a document review a site visit a test Intermediate deliverables may be in the form of: verification comments (May be listed in VerCom, Letter, or other agreed communication type) visit report audit report survey report. 2.5 Verification comments Reviews of documents will be reported using Verification Comment Sheets (often called VerComs).