dnvgl-se-0471 verification of onshore pipelines

The electronic pdf version of this document, available free of chargefrom http://www.dnvgl.com, is the officially binding version.

DNV GL AS

SERVICE SPECIFICATION

DNVGL-SE-0471 Edition August 2017

Verification of onshore pipelines

FOREWORD

DNV GL service specifications contain procedural requirements for obtaining and retainingcertificates and other conformity statements to the objects, personnel, organisations and/oroperations in question.

© DNV GL AS August 2017

Any comments may be sent by e-mail to [email protected]

This service document has been prepared based on available knowledge, technology and/or information at the time of issuance of thisdocument. The use of this document by others than DNV GL is at the user's sole risk. DNV GL does not accept any liability or responsibilityfor loss or damages resulting from any use of this document.

Cha

nges

- c

urre

nt

Service specification — DNVGL-SE-0471. Edition August 2017 Verification of onshore pipelines

DNV GL AS

CHANGES – CURRENT

GeneralThis document supersedes the December 2013 edition of DNV-DSS-316.The purpose of the revision of this service document is to comply with the new DNV GL document reference code system and profile requirements following the merger between DNV and GL in 2013. Changes mainly consist of updated company name and references to other documents within the DNV GL portfolio.

Some references in this service document may refer to documents in the DNV GL portfolio not yet published (planned published within 2017). In such cases please see the relevant legacy DNV or GL document. References to external documents (non-DNV GL) have not been updated.

Editorial correctionsIn addition to the above stated changes, editorial corrections may have been made.

Con

tent

s


DNV GL AS

CONTENTS

Changes – current.................................................................................................. 3

Section 1 Introduction............................................................................................ 61.1 General............................................................................................. 61.2 Definitions.........................................................................................71.3 References...................................................................................... 11

Section 2 Principles of risk-differentiated verification.......................................... 122.1 General........................................................................................... 122.2 Verification principles..................................................................... 122.3 Selection of level of verification involvement................................. 142.4 Defining a verification plan/scope of work.....................................172.5 Information flow.............................................................................17

Section 3 Verification activities.............................................................................203.1 General........................................................................................... 203.2 Project phases................................................................................ 203.3 Project initiation............................................................................. 213.4 Project realisation.......................................................................... 21

Section 4 Verification service requirements..........................................................274.1 General........................................................................................... 274.2 Verification service documents....................................................... 274.3 Use of quality management systems.............................................. 31

Appendix A Guideline on selection of verification involvement level based onsimplified verification planning.............................................................................33

A.1 General........................................................................................... 33A.2 Trigger questions............................................................................33

Appendix B Examples of verification documents...................................................36B.1 General........................................................................................... 36

Appendix C Detailed scope of work tables for verification.................................... 42C.1 General........................................................................................... 42C.2 Description of terms used in the scope of work tables....................42C.3 Overall project management.......................................................... 44C.4 Design.............................................................................................44C.5 Construction....................................................................................48

Con

tent

s


DNV GL AS

C.6 Operations...................................................................................... 72C.7 Environmental impacts................................................................... 72C.8 Third party safety impact assessment............................................ 75

Changes – historic................................................................................................79


DNV GL AS

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.1.1 Introduction

1.1.1.1 This DNV GL service specification (SE) provides criteria for and guidance on verification of completeonshore pipeline systems and verification of the integrity of parts or phases of an onshore pipeline system.

1.1.1.2 This SE does not provide a DNV GL 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 thescope of application of this SE. Such certification scheme shall be governed by the regulations of the appointing authorities. Hencethe appointing authorities should define the statutory certification scheme.

---e-n-d---o-f---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e---

1.1.1.3 This SE falls under the top level document DNVGL-SE-0474 Risk based verification and applies risk-differentiated levels of verification involvement.

1.1.1.4 This SE identifies and describes verification activities for an onshore pipeline system during design,construction (fabrication and installation) and operation.

1.1.1.5 The identified and described verification activities in this SE are generic. Based on the scope of worktables in Sec.3, the detailed verification scope of work tables in App.C should be subject to project specificrequirements tailoring based on risk assessments.

1.1.2 Objectives

1.1.2.1 The objectives of this document are to:

— describe DNV GL’s verification services for onshore pipeline systems,— provide guidance for customers and other parties for the selection of the level of DNV GL’s involvement in

the verification,— provide a common communication platform for describing extent of verification activities.

1.1.3 Verification service

1.1.3.1 This DNV GL service specification (SE) applies to verification during the design, construction andoperation of onshore pipeline systems.

1.1.3.2 This SE describes the principle of a DNV GL levelled verification involvement, which easily can beused in communications about the extent and scope of verification activities.

1.1.3.3 The primary scope of the verification work is to confirm that the design, construction, operationand environmental impact of the onshore pipeline systems complies with the specified requirements. Otheraspects, such as verification of flow assurance, may be included in DNV GL’s scope of work, if desired by thecustomer.

1.1.3.4 This principle of levelled verification involvement applies both to internal company verification orowners behalf as well as any obligations of licensees’ for independent verification where this is applicable.


DNV GL AS

1.1.4 Structure of this documentThis document consist of four sections and three appendices:

Sec.1 : gives the general scope of the document, definitions and references.

Sec.2 : describes the principles of verification based on risk differentiated levels of verificationinvolvement, how to define the level of verification involvement, and how to develop a verificationplan/scope of work for a particular project.

Sec.3 : describes generic verification activities for each of the project phases.

Sec.4 : describes the verification service; scope of work definition and documents issued by DNV GL as aresult of the verification service process.

App.A : poses trigger questions for the selection of level of verification involvement.

App.B : gives examples of DNV GL verification service documents.

App.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 worktables.

1.2 Definitions

1.2.1 Verbal formsTable 1-1 Definitions of verbal forms

Term Definition

shall verbal form used to indicate requirements strictly to be followed in order toconform to the document

should verbal form used to indicate that among several possibilities one is recommendedas particularly suitable, without mentioning or excluding others, or that a certaincourse of action is preferred but not necessarily required

may verbal form used to indicate a course of action permissible within the limits of thedocument


DNV GL AS

1.2.2 TermsTable 1-2 Definitions of terms

Term Definition

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 weightcoating. 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.

customer DNV GL’s contractual partner. It may be the purchaser, the owner or the contractor.

design all related engineering to design the pipeline including both structural as well as material, corrosionand construction

design phase an initial pipeline phase that takes a systematic approach to the production of specifications, drawingsand other documents to ensure that the onshore pipeline meets specified requirements (includingdesign reviews to ensure that design output is verified against design input requirements)

hazard a deviation (departure from the design and operating intention) which could cause damage, injury orother form of loss (Chemical Industries Association HAZOP guide)

hazard andoperability study(HAZOP)

the application of a formal systematic critical examination to the process and engineering intentions ofnew or existing facilities to assess the hazard potential of mal-operation or mal-function of individualitems of equipment and their consequential effects on the facility as a whole (Chemical IndustriesAssociation HAZOP guide)

hazardidentification(HAZID)

a technique for the identification of all significant hazards associated with the particular activity underconsideration (ISO-17776)

onshore pipelinesystem

buried and/or above ground pipeline including those sections laid in or across inland lakes or watercourses

The demarcation between onshore and offshore normally is laying at the average high water mark. Inthis 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 andagreed.Verification of pressure regulating, metering, compressor and pumping stations is not part of the scopefor this SE. In case such stations are part of the pipeline system they have to be considered and someguidance can be found in DNVGL-SE-0479 Verification of process facilities, DNVGL-SE-0469 Verification ofhydrocarbon refining and petrochemical facilities and DNVGL-SE-0470 Verification of onshore LNG and gasfacilities.


operations phase the phase when the pipeline is being used for the purpose for which it was designed

risk the qualitative or quantitative likelihood of an accident or unplanned event occurring, considered inconjunction with the potential consequences of such a failureIn quantitative terms, risk is the quantified probability of a defined failure mode times its quantifiedconsequence.


DNV GL AS

Term Definition

risk reductionmeasures

those measures taken to reduce the risks to the operation of the pipeline system and to theenvironment, 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

d) control

e) mitigation

f) emergency response.


safety objectives the safety goals for the construction, operation and decommissioning of the pipeline includingacceptance criteria for the level of risk acceptable to the customer

verification (ISO9000:2005)

confirmation, through the provision of objective evidence, that specified requirements have beenfulfilled

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.


verification service the verification service includes, in addition to performing verification, the issuing of a deliverable DNVGL 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 GL and the customer. Thescope of work may be described by reference to an object specific DNV GL service specification or technicalstandards specified by customer. In the case of an object specific DNV GL service specification forming thebasis for verification scope definition, any deviation or amendment to the scope of work outlined in the DNVGL service specification shall be addressed in the contract. The deliverables shall be agreed in the contract.The type of DNV GL document(s) that may be issued depends on the extent and nature of the verificationscope of work.



DNV GL AS

1.2.3 AbbreviationsTable 1-3 Abbreviations

Abbreviation Description

3PSIA 3rd party safety impact assessment

AUT automated ultrasonic testing

BV block valve

CP cathodic protection

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

SE DNV GL service specification

UT ultrasonic testing

WPAR welding procedure approval record

WPS welding procedure specification


DNV GL AS

1.3 ReferencesTable 1-4 References

Document code Tittle

- A Guide to Hazard and Operability Studies, 1979

Chemical Industries Association Limited, London

DNVGL-RP-A203 Technology qualification

DNVGL-RP-J202 Design and operation of carbon dioxide pipelines

DNVGL-SE-0469 Verification of hydrocarbon refining and petrochemical facilities

DNVGL-SE-0470 Verification of onshore LNG and gas facilities

DNVGL-SE-0474 Risk based verification

DNVGL-SE-0479 Verification of process facilities

EN 45011 General Criteria for Certification Bodies Operating Product Certification, 1998,European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

ISO 9000:2005 Quality management systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary, InternationalOrganization for Standardization, Geneva

ISO 9001:2008 Quality management systems – Requirements, International Organization forStandardization, Geneva

ISO 17000:2004 Conformity Assessment—Vocabulary and general principles, InternationalOrganization for Standardization, Geneva.BS 4778 Quality Vocabulary, Part 2Quality Concepts and Related Definitions, 1991, British Standards Institute,London


DNV GL AS

SECTION 2 PRINCIPLES OF RISK-DIFFERENTIATED VERIFICATION

2.1 General

2.1.1 Objectives

2.1.1.1 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.

2.2 Verification principles

2.2.1 Purpose of verification

2.2.1.1 Verification constitutes a systematic and independent examination of the various phases in the life ofa pipeline system to determine whether it fulfills the specified requirements.

2.2.1.2 Verification activities are expected to identify errors or failures in the work associated with thepipeline 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.

2.2.1.3 Verification is primarily focused on integrity, environmental impact and (human) safety, but businessrisk (cost and schedule) may be addressed, if required by the customer.

2.2.2 Verification - complementary activity

2.2.2.1 Verification shall be complementary to routine design, construction and operations activities andnot a substitute for them. Therefore, although verification will take into account the work, and the qualityassurance and quality control of that work, carried out by the customer and its contractors, it is inevitablethat verification will duplicate some work that has been carried out previously by other parties involved in thepipeline system.

2.2.2.2 Verification plans should be developed and implemented in such a way as to minimise additionalwork, and cost, but to maximise its effectiveness. This development of verification plans shall depend onthe findings from the examination of quality management systems, the examination of documents and theexamination of production activities.

2.2.3 Verification management

2.2.3.1 The verification philosophy and verification methods used shall be described to confirm satisfactorycompletion of the verification activities.

2.2.3.2 The verification methods shall ensure that verification:

— has a consistent and constructive approach to the satisfactory completion and operation of the pipelinesystem

— is available worldwide wherever the customer or his contractors operate— uses up-to-date methods, tools and procedures


DNV GL AS

— uses qualified and experienced personnel.

2.2.3.3 All verification activities shall be carried out by competent personnel. Competence includes havingthe necessary theoretical and practical knowledge and experience of the activity being examined. Anadequate verification of some activities may require access to specialised technical knowledge.

2.2.3.4 As well as demonstrating competence of individuals, the verification organisation shall be able toshow competence and experience in pipeline verification.

2.2.4 Risk-differentiated levels of verification involvement

2.2.4.1 The approach of risk-differentiated levels of verification involvement shall be applied to the definitionof verification plan/scope of work, as outlined in the general risk based verification service overview inDNVGL-SE-0474.

2.2.4.2 The level of verification involvement is differentiated according to the risk associated with thepipeline system. If the risk associated with the pipeline system is higher, the level of verification involvementis higher. Conversely, if the risk associated with the pipeline is lower, the level of verification activities can bereduced, without any reduction in their effectiveness.

2.2.4.3 Verification involvement of pipeline systems is categorised into low, medium and high. A summary ofthe 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 arehigher because, for example, it has highly corrosive contents, it is in adverse environmentalconditions, it is technically innovative or the contractors are not well experienced in the designand construction of similar pipelines.

Low: is the level of verification involvement applied where the risks associated with the pipeline arelower because, for example, it has benign contents, it is located in congenial environmentalconditions, or the contractors are well experienced in the design and construction of similarpipelines.

Table 2-1 Summary of verification involvement and guidance for their applicability – projectphase

Level Description of involvement Guidance for application on the level of involvement

Low — Review of general principles and productionsystems during design and construction.

— Review of principal design documents,construction procedures and qualification(e.g. manufacturing procedure qualificationtest - MPQT) reports.

— Visit-based attendance during system testingand start-up activities.

— Less comprehensive involvement than levelmedium.

— Proven pipeline designs with benign contents and/or installed in benign environmental conditions.

— Straightforward pipelines designed andconstructed by experienced contractors.

— Low consequences of failure from a safety,environmental or commercial point of view.

— Relaxed to normal completion schedule


DNV GL AS

Level Description of involvement Guidance for application on the level of involvement

Medium — Review of general principles and productionsystems during design and construction.

— Detailed review of principal and other selecteddesign documents with support of simplifiedindependent analyses.

— Full time attendance during (procedure)qualification (e.g. MPQT) and review of theresulting reports.

— Visit-based or intermittent presence at site.

— Pipelines in moderate environmental conditions[conditions that introduce moderate risksassociated with the pipeline (e.g. unstableslopes)].

— Pipeline introduces risks associated withmoderately 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.

High — Review of general principles and productionsystems during design and construction.

— Detailed review of most design documentswith support of simplified and advancedindependent analyses.

— Full time attendance during (procedure)qualification (e.g. MPQT) and review of theresulting reports.

— Full time presence at site for most activities.— More comprehensive involvement than level

medium.

— Innovative pipeline designs in extreme or sensitiveenvironmental conditions.

— Projects with a high degree of novelty or largeleaps in technology.

— Inexperienced contractors or exceptionally tightcompletion schedule.

— Very high consequences of failure from a safety,environmental or commercial point of view.

2.2.4.4 The selection of level of verification involvement shall be based on a risk based verification planningprocess. The selection of the most suitable verification involvement level may be guided by using thequestions proposed in App.A.

2.2.4.5 The basis for the selection of level of verification involvement shall be documented.

2.2.4.6 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:Pipeline design may be innovative and considered high risk whereas the construction method is well known and considered lowrisk. 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 millmay be considered high risk.


2.2.4.7 The level of verification involvement can be reduced or increased during a phase if the originallychosen level is considered too rigorous or too lenient, as new information on the risks associated with thepipeline system becomes available.

2.3 Selection of level of verification involvement

2.3.1 Selection factors

2.3.1.1 The selection of the level of verification involvement shall depend on the criticality of each of theelements that have an impact on the management of hazards and associated risk levels of the pipelinesystem. This is illustrated by Figure 2-1.


DNV GL AS

The contribution of each element should be judged qualitatively and/or quantitatively and shall use, wherepossible, quantified risk assessment data to provide a justifiable basis for any decisions made.

2.3.1.2 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.

Figure 2-1 Selection of the required level of verification involvement

2.3.2 Overall safety objective

2.3.2.1 An overall safety objective covering all phases of the pipeline system from design to operation shouldbe defined by the customer. The safety objective should address the main safety goals as well as establishingacceptance criteria for the level of risk acceptable to the customer. Depending on the pipeline and its locationthe risk could be measured in terms of human injuries as well as environmental, political and economicconsequences.

2.3.3 Risk assessment

2.3.3.1 A systematic review shall be carried out to identify and evaluate the probabilities and consequencesof 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 identifythe risk associated with the operation of the pipeline system and to the environment, health and safety ofpersonnel associated with it or in its vicinity.

2.3.3.2 Once the risks have been identified their extent can be reduced to a level as low as reasonablypracticable by means of one or both of:

— reduction in the probability of failure— mitigation of the consequences of failure.


DNV GL AS

Guidance note:The term “as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP)” has come into use through the United Kingdom’s “The Health and Safety atWork etc. Act 1974”. 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 andtrouble 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 reducingthat risk. Similarly, if the risk was very small it would not be reasonable to expect great expense or effort to be incurred inreducing it.


2.3.3.3 The result of the systematic review of these risks is measured against the safety objectives and usedin the selection of the appropriate verification involvement level.

2.3.4 Technical innovation and contractor experience

2.3.4.1 The degree of technical innovation in the pipeline system shall be considered. Risks associated withthe pipeline are likely to be greater for a pipeline with a high degree of technical innovation than with apipeline designed, manufactured and installed to well-accepted criteria in well-understood environmentalconditions.

2.3.4.2 Similarly, the degree of risk associated with the pipeline system should be considered wherecontractors are inexperienced or the work schedule is tight.

2.3.4.3 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.

2.3.5 Quality management systems

2.3.5.1 Adequate quality management systems shall be implemented to ensure that gross errors in the workfor pipeline system design, construction and operations are limited.

2.3.5.2 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 businessincreases, they expand their staff quickly by taking on contract personnel often for a fixed period or for the duration of a particularcontract.This influx of new personnel can lead to problems of control of both the whole organisation and of particular projects beingundertaken. Quality problems may then occur, as these new personnel have no detailed knowledge of the organisation’s businessmethods, its ethos or its working procedures. New organisations may experience quality problems for similar reasons.



DNV GL AS

2.4 Defining a verification plan/scope of work

2.4.1 Risk based verification planning

2.4.1.1 Based on the pipeline system specifications, the risk assessment and the selection of level ofverification involvement, a verification plan shall be developed.

2.4.1.2 The verification plan is the scope of work for DNV GL’s verification. It should be re-visited, re-evaluated and revised if required as the project progresses and new information becomes available.

2.4.1.3 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.3.

2.4.1.4 Typical detailed scope of work descriptions, which are based on the generic scopes of work and whichshow the activities to be verified, are given in App.C.

2.4.1.5 A specific scope of work description shall be made for each particular project, and shall be includedin the final DNV GL verification report.

2.5 Information flow

2.5.1 Communication lines

2.5.1.1 Communication lines are illustrated in Figure 2-2. Which lines that are open for communicationdepend on the particular contractual agreements.

2.5.1.2 For instances where DNV GL does not have a contract with the owner, DNV GL recommends stronglythat the owner, through his contract with the designer/constructor, secures a direct communication line fromDNV GL to owner and vice versa.

Guidance note:The recommendation comes from DNV GL’s experience with projects where communications difficulties between the parties havejeopardised the issue of the pipeline verification statement.



DNV GL AS

Figure 2-2 Communication lines

2.5.2 Obligations

2.5.2.1 In order to achieve the purpose and benefits of verification the involved parties shall be mutuallyobliged to share and act upon all relevant information pertaining to the verification scope.

2.5.2.2 The customer shall be obliged to:

— inform DNV GL about the basis for selecting the level of verification involvement and the investigationsand assumptions made in this context

— give DNV GL full access to all information concerning the verification scope for the pipeline system andensure that clauses to this effect are included in contracts for parties acting on behalf of the customer andparties providing products, processes and services covered by the verification scope

— ensure that DNV GL is involved in the handling of deviations from specified requirements within theverification scope

— act upon information provided by DNV GL with respect to events or circumstances that may jeopardise thepipeline system and/or the purpose and benefit of verification

— ensure that the safety objective established for the pipeline project is known and pursued by partiesacting on behalf of the customer and parties providing products, processes and services covered by theverification scope.

2.5.2.3 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 GL with all relevant information pertaining to the verification scope.

2.5.2.4 DNV GL shall be obliged to:

— inform the customer if, in the opinion of DNV GL, the basis for selecting the level of verificationinvolvement or the assumptions made in this respect are found to be in error or assessed incorrectly


DNV GL AS

— inform the customer of events or circumstances that, in the opinion of DNV GL, may jeopardise thepipeline system and/or the purpose and benefit of verification

— effectively perform all verification work and adjust the level of verification involvement according to theactual performance of parties providing products, processes and services covered by the verificationscope.

2.5.3 Notification of verification level involvement

2.5.3.1 An assessment of the required level of verification involvement for a project should be made by theowner before preparing tender documents for design and construction activities. The owner can then specifythis level in the invitations to tender. This will give contractors clear guidance and reference when estimatingthe extent and cost of efforts associated with verification activities.

2.5.3.2 The required level of verification involvement may be assessed by the owner using this SE. However,if the owner requires the contractor to carry out this assessment as part of his response to an invitation totender (ITT) the owner should provide the necessary information to enable the contractor to carry out thiswork. 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 designbrief.

Guidance note:Frequently ITTs contain the statement “…. the contractor shall arrange 3rd party verification.” The use of the information containedin 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 levelof verification involvement planned.



DNV GL AS

SECTION 3 VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES

3.1 General

3.1.1 ObjectivesThe objectives of this section are to provide:

— 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).

3.1.2 Scope of work

3.1.2.1 The process of defining a verification plan with a scope of work is described in [2.4]. Responsibilitiesand requirements to the definition of the verification plan is addressed in [1.1.3] for verification service.

3.1.2.2 The verification activities described in the scope of work tables are generic. Their relative riskrating, represented by the type of involvement at the different verification involvement levels, is based onexperience and does not take into account the specifics or differences between sweet and sour gas, etc.

3.2 Project phases

3.2.1 General principles

3.2.1.1 DNV GL’s verification of pipeline systems is normally based on distinct project phases and therecognition of key milestones.

3.2.1.2 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.


DNV GL AS

Guidance note:App.C includes some generic descriptions of typical sub-phases. This may be used as guidance when agreeing the content orcompleteness of a sub-phase. Where projects or other standards use other terms, these can be used provided they are welldefined and agreed.


3.3 Project initiation

3.3.1 Verification during conceptual design

3.3.1.1 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 andconstruction phases.

3.3.1.2 It is advisable to combine the design verification during conceptual design with additional review of:

— environmental aspects— project schedule— project cost.

3.4 Project realisation

3.4.1 General

3.4.1.1 All design and construction aspects relevant to pipeline safety and integrity may be covered by theverification service. During design the specifications (requirements) are developed, while the constructionprocedures describe how the requirements will be satisfied and implemented during construction.

3.4.2 Verification of overall project management

3.4.2.1 Verification of the overall project management is the examination of the means of controlling thepipeline project.

3.4.2.2 This verification should confirm that the necessary controls are in place to ensure information flowsacross the various interfaces. This is especially important where separate contractors have been employed fordifferent phases of the project such as design and construction.

3.4.2.3 Typically the documentation is expected to be in line with ISO 9001 requirements.

3.4.2.4 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

Level

Verification activity L M H

Review of the project management process

— review of project quality management documentation x x x

— audit/attend customer’s audit of project quality management system x


DNV GL AS

Level


— review of sub-contractor control x

— review of interface controls x

— review of methods of information flow x

3.4.3 Verification during design

3.4.3.1 Design verification is the examination of the assumptions, methods and results of the design processand is performed at the specified level of verification involvement to confirm that the specified requirementsof the pipeline system will be achieved.

3.4.3.2 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.

3.4.3.3 Definition of scope of work for verification of design should follow Table 3-2.

Table 3-2 Scope of work for verification of design

Level


Review of the design process

— 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

— review of the design basis with emphasis of the survey results, ESIA and3PSI assessment data. Evaluation of the design criteria

x x x

— pipeline route and environmental conditions 1) x x x

Review of design reports and drawings2)

— review of the main onshore pipeline documentation to confirm that themain load conditions have been accounted for in design, that the governingconditions are identified, and that the chosen design philosophies are inaccordance with specified codes and standards

x x x

— evaluation of the main methods used and spot checks of the input data andthe calculation results

x x

— detail review of main design reports x


DNV GL AS

Level


Performing independent parallel calculations

— 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

— 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 aspects3))

— 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 GL 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, safetysystems, 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 theproject initiation phase) and detailed design, or other sub-phase, depending on type of contract.


3.4.4 Verification during construction

3.4.4.1 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 specifiedrequirements of the onshore pipeline system will be achieved.

3.4.4.2 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.


DNV GL AS

3.4.4.3 Definition of scope of work for verification of construction should follow Table 3-3 and Table 3-4 formanufacturing 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 otherpressure containing components

Level


Review of the manufacturing and 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 and fabrication procedures

— Review manufacturing, fabrication and inspection procedures forconfirmation of compliance with the manufacturing specification

x x x

— Review method statements x x

Review of qualification process

— Review the manufacturing procedure specification, (MPS), manufacturingprocedure 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

— Visit-based attendance during testing, to confirm, based on spot checks,that the delivered products have been produced in accordance with themanufacturing specification

x x x

— Visit-based or full-time attendance during manufacturing and fabricationto confirm, based on spot checks, that the delivered products have beenproduced in accordance with the manufacturing specification

x x

— Full-time attendance during manufacturing and fabrication to confirm,based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced inaccordance with the manufacturing specification

x

— for linepipe production only: overall independent verification of production byDNV GL

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 theoverall verification activities, so as not to duplicate work.



DNV GL AS

Table 3-4 Scope of work for verification of manufacturing and fabrication of coatings and othernon-pressure containing components

Level


Review of the manufacturing and fabrication process

— Review of manufacturing and fabrication management systems x x x


Review of manufacturing and fabrication procedures

— Review manufacturing, fabrication and inspection procedures forconfirmation of compliance with the manufacturing specification

x x


— Review the manufacturing procedure specification, (MPS), manufacturingprocedure 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 themanufacturing specification

x x

— Visit-based attendance during manufacturing and fabrication to confirm,based on spot checks, that the delivered products have been produced inaccordance with the manufacturing specification

x


Table 3-5 Scope of work for verification of installation

Level


Review of the installation process

— Review of installation management systems x x 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 shouldcontain all the threads to the onshore pipeline system)

x x


— For critical operations, review the qualification of the IM x x x


DNV GL AS

Level


— Full time attendance during qualification tests, if applicable, or productionstart-up

x x

Surveillance during installation activities

— Visit-based attendance during start-up of construction activities (i.e.pipelaying, water crossings, CP installation, block valve (BV) interventionworks, horizontal directional drilling (HDD) etc.)

x x x

— Full time attendance during qualification tests: visit- based attendanceduring construction

x x

— Full time attendance during construction (i.e. pipelaying, water crossings,HDD, CP and BV installation, intervention works

x


Table 3-6 Scope of work for verification of final testing for operation, including as-built surveyand project completion

Level


Review of the process

— Review of management systems x x x


Review of procedures

— Review of procedures to confirm that the test procedures will test theonshore pipeline system in accordance with the design requirements:System pressure test, CP system and BV commissioning

x x x

Surveillance during testing and completion activities

— Full time attendance during pressure testing (min 24hrs). Visit basedattendance during CP and BV commissioning

x x x

— Full time attendance during all pre-commissioning testings and audit basedattendance during cleaning, gauging, de-watering and drying. Visit-basedattendance during as-built surveying

x

Review of final documentation

— Spot check of as-built documentation x x x

— Review of as-built documentation x


DNV GL AS

SECTION 4 VERIFICATION SERVICE REQUIREMENTS

4.1 General

4.1.1 Objectives

4.1.1.1 The objectives of this section are to provide:

— details of DNV GL’s verification services for onshore pipeline systems— details of DNV GL’s deliverables for verification service for onshore pipeline systems.

4.1.2 Scope of work

4.1.2.1 The verification service is described in [1.1.3].

4.1.2.2 The scope of work is determined by and shall be described in a contract between DNV GL and thecustomer.

4.1.2.3 [2.4] describes the process of defining a risk-differentiated verification plan/scope of work. Thecustomer may stipulate the level of verification involvement.

4.2 Verification service documents

4.2.1 General

4.2.1.1 The type of DNV GL documents that may be issued depends on the extent and nature of theverification scope of work.

4.2.1.2 DNV GL 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 theconclusions reached, by DNV GL. The verification documents are as follows and the hierarchy is shown inFigure 4-1 below:

— statement of conformity— verification report— intermediate documents:

— audit reports— verification comments— visit reports.


DNV GL AS

Figure 4-1 Document hierarchy for verification

4.2.1.3 Verification documents are, in principle, documents confirming that an examination has been carriedout, and are valid only at the date of issue.

4.2.2 DNV GL statement of conformity

4.2.2.1 A statement of conformity may be issued by DNV GL as a statement confirming that verification ofdocuments and/or activities has concluded that the pipeline system complies with specified requirements. Inorder for DNV GL 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 part shall mean a complete system, or the integration of more systems, to which risk basedverification is or may be applied

— DNV GL shall have accepted the level of verification involvement to be satisfactory in relation to the risksassociated 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 statementof conformity, e.g. in the design verification scope aspects like safety or structural integrity may not beomitted from individual components or systems

— there shall be no unresolved deviations, i.e. no open verification comments, which inherently infringe theintegrity of the pipeline system

— the statement is valid on the date of issue.

4.2.2.2 Alternatives to detailed requirements/solutions in the verification reference may be acceptable whenthe overall integrity, safety and reliability level is documented and, in DNV GL’s interpretation, found to beequivalent or better than that of the verification reference. This principle of equivalence does not apply toverification against non-DNV GL reference documents.

4.2.2.3 The statement of conformity shall be supported by a verification report, which shall be referencedfrom the statement of conformity.

4.2.3 Verification report

4.2.3.1 A verification report may be issued by DNV GL as a statement confirming the conclusion of theverification process. A verification report may in principle be issued at any stage of the verification process.


DNV GL AS

4.2.3.2 A verification report may be issued in conjunction with a statement of conformity.

4.2.3.3 A verification report may be in the form of a close-out report covering the completion of a self-contained part of the verification of a pipeline system.

4.2.3.4 A verification report may be the final deliverable if the requirements to a statement of conformity arenot fulfilled or a statement of conformity is not required.

4.2.3.5 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 thereport they are addressed in detail. Deviations that are addressed through alternative solutions shall beincluded in the list. Such solutions may imply e.g. operational limitations.

4.2.3.6 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).

4.2.4 Intermediate documents

4.2.4.1 DNV GL may issue intermediate documentation of progress or conclusion related to individualverification elements:

— a document review— a site visit— a test.

4.2.4.2 Intermediate deliverables may be in the form of:

— verification comments (may be listed in VerCom, Letter, email or other agreed communication type)— visit report— audit report— survey report.

4.2.5 Verification comments

4.2.5.1 Reviews of documents will be reported using verification comment sheets (often called VerComs).These documents give details to the customer of aspects of onshore pipeline design and construction thatDNV GL:

— considers not to meet the specified requirements— does not have enough information to make a conclusion— offers advice based on its experience.

Only in the first two instances DNV GL expects a response from the customer or its contractors.

4.2.5.2 An example of a typical verification comment sheet is shown in App.B.


DNV GL AS

4.2.6 Audit report

4.2.6.1 Audit reports are issued to confirm that a company’s quality management system has been reviewedto confirm compliance (or not) with the nominated standard and project requirements. In addition, the auditreports confirm compliance with the documented procedures and that these procedures are effective.

4.2.6.2 Audit reports will contain information such as whether:

— the company has a documented quality system— this quality system been certified by an accredited certification body for the product (or service) in

question— the quality system adequately covers the following quality assurance elements for the product:

— organisation— authority/responsibility— job descriptions for key persons— internal quality audits— documentation change control— job instructions/procedures— nonconformity/corrective action.

— there are adequate procedures for activities such as:

— calibration of equipment— material identification and marking— control of special processes such as welding, NDT, PWHT— nonconformity identification and handling— inspection status— final inspection.

— the company’s facilities are, in general, considered adequate for the scope of supply

— a quality plan has been prepared for the order concerned

— the purchaser or their appointed inspection agency plan to attend the works

— there are any problem areas identified.

4.2.6.3 An example of a typical audit report is shown in App.B.

4.2.7 Visit reports

4.2.7.1 Visit reports are documentation/recording of attendance activity by DNV GL.Guidance note:Visit reports may be referred as, e.g. survey report, inspection certificate, site report etc.


4.2.7.2 A visit report shall contain enough information to identify clearly the product or service that hasbeen examined, the operating conditions or specifications to which it has been examined and the conclusionreached by DNV GL.

4.2.7.3 The visit report will be issued on the relevant form and will contain as much information as possiblein accordance with the standard headings in the form. In addition, the report number shall be shown.

4.2.7.4 An example of a typical visit report is shown in App.B.


DNV GL AS

4.3 Use of quality management systems

4.3.1 General

4.3.1.1 The assurance of onshore pipeline integrity requires that gross errors during design, constructionand operation be minimised. The likelihood of gross errors shall be reduced in a systematic manner by theoperation of a quality management system adequate for the work being carried out.

4.3.1.2 Quality management systems are frequently documented at three levels:

— The quality manual and related procedures document how the organisation, as a whole, manages thequality of all its products and services.

— The quality plan documents the specific procedures related to a particular project.— The inspection and test plan documents how the quality control activities for a particular project shall be

carried out and recorded.

4.3.2 Quality plans

4.3.2.1 The basic function of a quality plan is as an aide mémoire in the management of a project. Inan organisation with many quality procedures for a variety of functions the quality plan states those thatare applicable to that particular project. The quality plan acts as a route map through the complexities ofmanagement of the project and highlights those activities relevant to quality management.

4.3.2.2 The project quality plan normally consists of two parts; firstly, a narrative description of the meansof controlling the project, and secondly, a tabular description of the inspections and tests to be carried outduring the work.

4.3.2.3 The quality plan should address:

— organisational details of the project— authorities and responsibilities of key personnel— interfaces between, the customer, contractors, sub-contractors and third parties— quality assurance activities placed on sub-contractors— cross references to existing company procedures.

4.3.2.4 The narrative part of the quality plan should include a description of:

— the applicable standards— project organisation and responsibilities— review of the contractual requirements— project planning and progress reporting— procedures for such activities as design control, purchasing, construction, commissioning, interface control

and auditing.

4.3.2.5 Additionally, the narrative part of the plan should describe the documentation requirements. Itshould be specified:

— what documents are required— at what stage these documents are required— who is responsible for preparing the documents— relevant parties to whom documents are submitted— how any necessary approvals are acquired— who has originals and who has copies


DNV GL AS

— if copies have to be certified copies— the length of time documents should be retained and by whom.

4.3.3 Inspection and test plans

4.3.3.1 The tabular description of the inspections and tests to be carried out during the work is frequentlyknown as the inspection and test plan.

4.3.3.2 The following items should be checked for inclusion within the inspection and test plan:

— Each inspection and test point and its relative location in the production cycle should be shown.— The characteristics to be inspected and tested at each point should be identified.— The use of sub-contractors should be indicated and details of how the verification of sub-contractor’s

quality shall be carried out should be shown.— Hold points established by the constructor, the operator or a third party, where witness or review of the

selected inspection or test is required, should be shown.

4.3.4 Review of quality management system

4.3.4.1 The contractor’s quality manual may be reviewed for compliance with ISO 9001 as appropriate. Thecontractor’s operations should be audited to establish compliance with the documented system.

4.3.4.2 If the contractor has a quality system certified by an accredited certification body, this may be takenas evidence of a satisfactory quality system provided the certificate is relevant to the contractor’s scope ofwork for the pipeline. However, the last two years’ periodical audit reports should be reviewed to identify ifany recurring non-conformities have been revealed.

4.3.4.3 Any weaknesses revealed during this audit, or review of periodical audit reports, should beconsidered when planning the contractor monitoring activities.

4.3.4.4 Surveillance of the continuing acceptability of the contractor’s quality management system is carriedout by observing a selection of audits carried out by the contractor as part of its internal audit system. Theaudits to be observed should be selected over the length of the project at suitable intervals and should coveras wide a selection of activities as possible.

4.3.4.5 Contractors’ inspection and test plans for the various activities undertaken during their scope of workfor the pipeline should be reviewed and accepted, if adequate.


DNV GL AS

APPENDIX A GUIDELINE ON SELECTION OF VERIFICATIONINVOLVEMENT LEVEL BASED ON SIMPLIFIED VERIFICATIONPLANNING

A.1 General

A.1.1 General principles

A.1.1.1 The selection of the level of verification involvement depends on the criticality of each of theelements that have an impact on the management of risks associated with the pipeline system.

A.1.1.2 The verification process shall direct greatest effort at those elements of the pipeline system wherethe risk is highest and whose failure or reduced performance will have the most significant impact regarding:

— pipeline integrity— safety risks— environmental risks— economic risks— regulatory risks.

A.1.1.3 Suitable selection factors include, but are not limited to, 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 the work— quality management systems of the customer and its contractors.

A.1.1.4 Due to the diversity of various pipeline systems, their contents, their degree of innovation, thegeographic location, et cetera, it is not possible to give precise directions on how to decide what level ofverification involvement is appropriate for each particular pipeline system.

A.1.1.5 Therefore, guidance is given as a series of questions that should be answered when deciding theappropriate level of verification involvement for a pipeline system. This list is not exhaustive and otherquestions should be added to the list if appropriate for a particular pipeline system.

A.1.1.6 It should be emphasised that the contribution of each element should be judged qualitatively and/or quantitatively. Wherever possible quantified risk assessment data should be used to provide a justifiablebasis for any decisions made.

A.1.1.7 Depending on the stage of the project, the activities may not have taken place yet in which case thequestions can also be posed in another form, i.e. “Is …. planned to be implemented?”

A.2 Trigger questions

A.2.1 Overall safety objective— Does the safety objective address the main safety goals?— Does the safety objective establish acceptance criteria for the level of risk acceptable to the customer?— Is this risk (depending on the pipeline and its location) measured in terms of human injuries as well as

environmental, economic, regulatory and political consequences?


DNV GL AS

A.2.2 Assessment of risk— Has a systematic review been carried out to identify and evaluate the probabilities and consequences of

failures in the pipeline system?— Has this review judged the contribution of each element qualitatively and/or quantitatively and used,

where possible, quantified risk assessment data to provide a justifiable basis for any decisions made?— Does the extent of the review reflect the criticality of the pipeline system, the planned operation and

previous experience with similar pipeline systems?— Does this review identify the risk associated with the operation of the pipeline system and to the health

and safety of personnel associated with it or in its vicinity?— Has the extent of the identified risks been 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?

— Has the result of the systematic review of the risks been measured against the Customer’s safetyobjective?

— Has the result of this review been used in the selection of the appropriate verification activity level?

A.2.3 Technical innovation— Has the degree of technical innovation in the pipeline system been considered?— Has it been considered that risks associated with the pipeline are likely to be greater with a high degree of

technical innovation than with a pipeline designed, manufactured and installed to well-accepted criteria inwell-understood environmental conditions?

— Have factors been considered in the selection of the appropriate verification level involvement such as:

— Degree of difficulty in achieving technical requirements.— Knowledge of similar pipelines.— Effect of the new pipeline on the surrounding area.

A.2.4 Contractors’ experience— Has the degree of risk associated with the pipeline system been considered where design, manufacturer

and fabrication, construction or installation contractors are inexperienced?— Has the degree of risk been considered where the contractors are experienced but not in similar work?— Has the degree of risk been considered where the work schedule is tight?

A.2.5 Quality management systems— Have all parties involved in the pipeline system implemented an adequate quality management system to

ensure that gross errors in the work are limited?— Do these parties include the:

— owner— design contractor— line pipe and component manufacturers— fabricators— construction contractors— installation contractor— operator


DNV GL AS

— do the factors being considered when evaluating the adequacy of the quality management systeminclude:

— 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.


DNV GL AS

APPENDIX B EXAMPLES OF VERIFICATION DOCUMENTS

B.1 General

B.1.1 Introduction

B.1.1.1 This appendix includes example forms for use by DNV GL in the verification of pipeline systems.The following forms are included:

— statement of conformity— verification comments sheet— audit report— visit report.


DNV GL AS

B.1.2 Statement of conformity

EXAMPLE


DNV GL AS

B.1.3 Verification comments sheet


DNV GL AS

B.1.4 Audit report

EXAMPLE


DNV GL AS

EXAMPLE


DNV GL AS

B.1.5 Visit report

EXAMPLE


DNV GL AS

APPENDIX C DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK TABLES FORVERIFICATION

C.1 General

C.1.1 Introduction

C.1.1.1 This appendix gives the format of the detailed scope of work tables that should be made for eachparticular project.

C.1.1.2 The detailed project specific scope of work tables for the chosen level of verification involvementshould be based on these tables. For pipeline project scenarios of components not covered in this appendixsimilar tables with the same degree of detail, should be made.

C.1.1.3 If any of the activities are moved from one phase to another, then this should be identified clearlyon the table where it is removed. Similarly, the detailed table for the phase to where it is moved should beamended.

Guidance note:Typically, contractual boundaries may give natural splits of activities between phases. However, then it is even more important toensure that there is a traceability as to which phases what activity belong and that this is conveyed to the contractors also.


C.2 Description of terms used in the scope of work tables

C.2.1 General

C.2.1.1 The following abbreviations and definitions have been used:

— X is part of scope; attendance at meeting, issue report, etc.— A is audit— S is surveillance— I is for information— R is review.

C.2.1.2 These abbreviations are DNV GL’s preferred terms and should be used in DNV GL-generateddocuments. However, other terms, for example monitoring or witnessing, may be used by DNV GL if theseare the terms commonly used in documents, such as inspection and test plans, generated by others. In thatcase, it is expected that these other terms are defined in these documents.

C.2.2 Audit

C.2.2.1 Systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining audit evidence and evaluating itobjectively to determine the extent to which audit criteria are fulfilled. (ISO 9001: 2008).

Guidance note:This activity differs from the surveillance by being focused on the adherence to and completeness and robustness of theprocedures and not on the actual result of the procedure (although this is not ignored). Further, the audit is normally a one-offactivity as opposed to the continuity in monitoring.



DNV GL AS

C.2.3 Review

C.2.3.1 Systematic examination of reports and documentation. The depth of review will depend on the typeof document, any independent analyses/calculations performed by DNV GL, project phase and the level ofverification involvement. In principle, it is the solutions for the design, construction and operation elementsdescribed in the documents that shall be verified.

C.2.3.2 The documents shall be divided into verification documents and reference documents. Verificationdocuments are the documents DNV GL shall verify. Reference documents are the documents against whichthe verification documents are verified. DNV GL may rely on the information in the reference documents andshall have no obligation to review, evaluate or verify this information. DNV GL may notify the customer of anerror in a reference documents, however, this does not mean that DNV GL reviewed, evaluated or verified thereference document.

C.2.3.3 The following shall be used to describe the extent of the examination if not otherwise specificallydefined:

— I = for information only— R1 = for review of principles and general aspects, spot checks of input/output data— R2 = for comprehensive review.

Guidance note:Dependent on the project phase and kind of document, a comprehensive review (R2) may constitute review of details of thedocument, and/or a verification of the interaction between conclusions from different documents and the totality of the design.Review of production records does not guarantee their correctness. It is a confirmation to DNV GL that the manufacturer and/orsub-contractor has performed the required activity and issued a report.


C.2.3.4 Reports that are reviewed by DNV GL shall, unless otherwise agreed, not be signed and stamped.

C.2.4 Surveillance

C.2.4.1 Continual monitoring and verification of the status of an entity and analysis of records to confirmthat specified requirements are being fulfilled.

Guidance note:Other commonly used terms for surveillance are monitoring or witnessing.


C.2.4.2 The amount of work involved in surveillance is not described in detail in the tables. This shall be partof the final contractual scope of work which shall define the frequency of surveillance based on the overallsurveillance and the quality control performed by other parties as well as DNV GL’s experience.

C.2.4.3 The following shall be used to describe the frequency if not otherwise specifically defined:

- S1 = Surveillance on a visit basis, e.g. once per week

- S2 = Surveillance frequency minimum once per day

- S3 = Surveillance frequency minimum once per shift.

Guidance note:These surveillance frequencies should be modified to correspond with production work flow.



DNV GL AS

C.3 Overall project management

C.3.1 General

C.3.1.1 The project quality management documentation shall be available at the early stages of the project,preferably before design is underway, to confirm that the necessary controls are in place.

C.3.2 Detailed scope of work for overall project management

C.3.2.1 A detailed scope of work for the overall project management is given in Table C-1.

Table C-1 Overall project management

LevelItem Description

Low Medium High

1 review of project quality management documentation R1 R1 R2

2 audit/attend customer’s audit of project quality management system - A A

3 review of sub-contractor control - I R1

4 review of interface controls - I R1

5 review of methods of information flow - I R1

C.4 Design

C.4.1 General

C.4.1.1 For design verification a list similar to that given in Table C-2 shall be made for the specifics of theminimum requirement to documentation for each pipeline system.

C.4.1.2 The documentation of the items under General in Table C-2 shall be available at the early stages ofthe design. Of the remainder of the documentation in Table C-2, all shall be completed and be made availableto DNV GL if requested, before the statement of conformity can be issued.

C.4.2 Design verification

C.4.2.1 The design and planning for an onshore pipeline system shall cover all development phases includingprocurement/fabrication, construction and operation and, further, that all documentation requirements shallbe reflected in a document register. The documentation to be produced and issues to be covered duringdesign are given in Table C-2.

C.4.2.2 Table C-2 describes the issues to be verified and Table C-3 identifies the extent of independentanalyses/calculations included in the three different levels of involvement. Sections [C.4.3], [C.4.4] and[C.4.5] describe the verification for each of the levels.


DNV GL AS

C.4.3 Low level design verification

C.4.3.1 The initial low level design verification consists of a detailed document review of the design basis,risk assessment/analysis documentation, quality management documentation and (if they exist) methodor design philosophy documents. The presumed critical aspects of the project shall be identified by DNV GLfrom the initial review and conveyed to the customer and designer for discussion and agreement on correctunderstanding.

C.4.3.2 The subsequent verification consists of document review of the calculations/analysis methods usedto conclude the critical aspects. Other design documents are used as information and a few will be spotchecked for confirmation of the quality control.

C.4.3.3 Implementation of the transfer of conclusions from design calculations/reports into drawings andspecifications is not included.

C.4.4 Medium level design verification

C.4.4.1 Medium level design verification consists of a review of all main design documents related to pipelinesafety and integrity. Less critical aspects will be spot checked. The review will be detailed for all criticalaspects and independent checks will be performed.

C.4.4.2 Implementation of the conclusions from design calculations/reports into drawings and specificationswill be included on a spot check basis.

C.4.5 High level design verification

C.4.5.1 High level design verification consists of a full review of most of the produced documents related topipeline safety and integrity. The review will be detailed for all critical aspects and independent checks will beperformed.

C.4.5.2 Implementation of the conclusions from design calculations/reports into drawings and specificationsis included.

C.4.5.3 The main specifications are also checked for clearness and ambiguity.

C.4.6 Scope of work for design

C.4.6.1 Detailed scope of work for design is given in Table C-2 and Table C-3.

Table C-2 Pipeline integrity design


Low Medium High

General

1. Safety objective I I I

2. Confirmation that the different contractors and sub-contractors’ qualitysystems meet the requirements of ISO 9000 R1 R1 R1

3. Description of pipeline system and overall project organization I I R1


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

4. Survey report I I R1

5. Risk assessment and identification of critical aspects R1 R1 R1

6. Document register I I I

Main

7. Design basis R1 R1 R2

8. Pipeline operation and control philosophy report R1 R1 R2

9. Process flow diagram (PFD) I R1 R1

10. Pressure protection system/SCADA R1 R1 R2

11.

Pipeline routing (taking into account geotechnical hazards andrecommended routing, compliance with defined safety distances fromrisk assessments, land use reports, identified crossings, statutorypermits)

I R1 R2

12. Physical and chemical characteristics of fluid I I R1

13. Materials selection including internal corrosion assessment (line pipeand pipeline components) R1 R1 R2

14. Flow assurance (temperature/pressure profiles, slugging, thermohydraulic analyses) R1 R1 R2

14. Pressure containment (wall thickness calculations) R1 R1 R2

16. Engineering critical assessment – fracture control R1 R1 R2

17. Pipeline mechanical design (concentrated loads, expansion, bending,anchor block and buoyancy where applicable) R1 R1 R2

18. Road/railway/river crossings R1 R1 R2

19. Protection against accidental loads i.e third party, lightning, soilsubsistence, slides, flooding and earthquake (whatever applicable) R1 R1 R2

20. Pipe branch design I R1 R1

21. Pipe lifting analysis I R1 R1

22. Pump or compressor stations specification1) R1 R1 R2

23. Pig trap I R1 R1

24. Valve/actuator specification I R1 R1

25. Valve/actuator calculation I R1 R1

26. Flange specification R1 R1 R1

27. Fitting specification R1 R1 R1

28. Induction bend specification R1 R1 R1


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

29.Pipeline installation specification (route preparation, line pipetransportation, handling and stockpiling, pipe string lifting andlowering, excavation and backfilling)

R1 R1 R2

30. Emergency plan R1 R1 R2

31. Isolation joint specification I R1 R2

32. Pre-commissioning and commissioning specification R1 R1 R2

Main drawings

33. Pipeline route drawings R1 R1 R1

34. Detailed pipeline crossing drawings I R1 R1

Line pipe and pipeline components (including welding)

35. Line pipe specifications R1 R1 R2

36. Welding specifications R1 R1 R2

37. Material take off/data sheets - I R1

Corrosion control systems

38. Corrosion protection design report R1 R1 R1

39. Corrosion protection specifications I R1 R1

40. Coating specifications I R1 R1

41. Field joint coating specification(s) I R1 R1

42. Corrosion monitoring system specification I R1 R1

43. Material take off/data sheets - I R1

Pipeline control and safety systems

44. Pipeline control and safety system philosophy R1 R1 R2

45. Functional safety management plan R1 R1 R2

46. SIL (safety integrity level) allocation report for the pipeline safetysystem I R1 R2

47. Safety requirements specification I R1 R2

48. SIL verification report I R1 R1

49. Pipeline control system (PCS) functional design specification I R1 R1


DNV GL AS

Note: that verification of pump or compressor stations is not a part of the scope for this SE. In case suchstations are a part of the pipeline system they have to be considered and some guidance can be found inDNVGL-SE-0479 Verification of process facilities.

Table C-3 Independent analyses/calculations for pipeline integrity design (optional)

LevelItem Activity Description

Low Medium High

1. Wall thickness Calculations based on empirical formulas x x x

2. ExpansionCalculations based on empirical formulas; Ensurethat spools are adequately designed to absorb theexpansion.

(x) x x

3. Global bucklingCalculations based on empirical formulas;Checksafety margins against vertical movement ofpipeline.

(x) x

4. Spool Calculations based on empirical formulas (x)

5. SoilCalculations based on empirical formulas; Soilsupport/foundation, pipe-soil interaction incl.resistance towards axial and upheaval movement.

(x) x

6. Corrosion Corrosion analysis (x) (x)

7. Buoyancy Buoyancy calculations where there is high watertable, muskeg, water crossings etc (x) x x

8. Steady state flow Pressure loss calculations based on analyticalformulas x

9. Crossing design Calculations based on empirical formulas ornumerical analysis (x) x x

x = analysis/check will be included in the scope of work (if relevant)

(x) = analysis/check should be included in the scope of work if the issue is identified as critical or highly utilised.Then final decision of inclusion in the scope of work will be a result of the document review of simple analysis.

The activities presented in the Table C-3 above can be done based on agreement.

C.5 Construction

C.5.1 General

C.5.1.1 Construction of onshore pipelines consists of a number of different site activities and their associateddocumentation.

C.5.1.2 Table C-4 and Table C-5 summarise the scope of work tables included in this section for variousconstruction activities.

C.5.1.3 For onshore pipeline construction, quality surveillance lists similar to those shown hereafter shall bemade for the specifics of the particular project.


DNV GL AS

C.5.2 Construction quality surveillance

C.5.2.1 For verification and quality surveillance of onshore pipeline systems construction activities areconsidered as:

— initial verification activities— inspection activities— final activities.

C.5.2.2 The initial verification activities include the review of procedures, attendance during qualification ofprocedures (e.g. MPQT) and personnel (e.g. welders etc.) and other start-up activities.The inspection activities are the manufacturing- and construction site attendance and the final activities arethe (continuous) review of production results and test records and the completion of documentation andreports.

C.5.3 Low level construction quality surveillance

C.5.3.1 For low level quality surveillance, the procedure review consists of a review of the constructionmanagement procedures and confirmation that the most important aspects of the main specifications havebeen included in the procedures. For the qualification of procedures and personnel DNV GL will not attend theactual qualification, but will review the results.

C.5.3.2 During the onshore pipeline construction, DNV GL’s quality surveillance activities will be performedduring site visits. The quality surveillance will focus on the critical items/aspects identified in the detailedscope of work tables.

C.5.3.3 The subsequent quality surveillance of the final activities will be by spot-checks of the productionrecords including nonconformity logs, and results from audits, both contractors internal audits or auditsperformed by other parties.

C.5.4 Medium level construction quality surveillance

C.5.4.1 For medium level quality surveillance, the procedure review consists of a detailed review ofconstruction management procedures. Other important procedures will be spot checked to confirm that themost important aspects of the specifications have been included.

C.5.4.2 For the qualification of procedures and personnel DNV GL will visit the main qualifications and reviewthe results.

C.5.4.3 During construction, DNV GL’s quality surveillance will be performed by full time attendance at themain sites. The quality surveillance will focus on the critical items/aspects as identified in the detailed scopeof work tables.

C.5.4.4 Quality surveillance of the final activities will be by review of the production records includingnonconformity logs, and results from audits, both contractor’s internal audits or audits performed by otherparties, from the main sites and spot checks of the same from other important sites.

C.5.5 High level construction quality surveillance

C.5.5.1 For high level quality surveillance, the procedure review consists of a detailed review of constructionmanagement procedures. Other procedures will be spot checked to confirmation that important aspects ofthe specifications have been included.


DNV GL AS

C.5.5.2 For qualification of procedures and personnel DNV GL will attend the main qualifications, visit otherqualifications and review the results.

C.5.5.3 During construction, DNV GL’s quality surveillance will be performed by full time attendance at themain sites and by visits to the other important sites. Quality surveillance will focus on the critical items/aspects as identified in the detailed scope of work tables.

C.5.5.4 Quality surveillance of the final activities will be by detailed review of the production recordsincluding the nonconformity log, and results from audits, both contractors internal audits and auditsperformed by other parties, from the main sites and spot checks of the same from other important sites.

C.5.6 Quality surveillance of construction work

C.5.6.1 Quality surveillance monitoring performed by the customer during construction relates to theactivities of the construction contractor.Verification of the quality surveillance activities by DNV GL relates not only to the contractor’s activities, butalso to the monitoring of activities carried out by the customer’s quality surveillance team if stated in theverification plan.The emphasis placed on the various activities in the verification plan varies depending on:

— any areas of concern revealed during design verification— any areas of concern revealed during the audit of the owner’s and/or contractor’s quality management

systems, internal risk assessment and project execution procedures— the performance- and progress of construction activities— the findings of the contractor’s quality surveillance team.

C.5.6.2 Many contractors have adequate quality control systems and quality control departments, withcompetent personnel to perform, for example, inspection at mills and coating plants and specialist materialengineers competent to review and verify the performance of mills.

C.5.6.3 In that case, all verification work need not be done by DNV GL personnel. Where applicable, thevarious inspections may be carried out by competent persons other than DNV GL personnel. In that situationDNV GL’s verification activities can be confined to:

— reviewing the competence of the contractor’s personnel— auditing their working methods and their performance of the work— reviewing the documents produced by them.

C.5.6.4 DNV GL personnel will especially follow up areas where problems have occurred, or are consideredlikely to occur. Conversely, less time is spent in areas where the likelihood and/or consequence of problemsare considered lower.

C.5.7 DNV GL final report

C.5.7.1 The scope of work tables for construction normally include a last item entitled “Issue of DNV GLclose-out report”. This item is not related to the production process, but intended as a reminder to the DNVGL (or others) inspection personnel that a final report of their verification activities is required to finish thework.


DNV GL AS

Table C-4 Construction summary table - fabrication

Table no. Table description

C-6 Steel making

C-7 Coil or plate rolling

C-8 Linepipe production

C-9 Loading and handling operations

C-10 Coating application (internal or external)

C-11 Insulating joint fabrication

C-12 Fabrication of pressure containing components

C-13 Inspection of valves (and actuators) fabrication activities

C-14 Fabrication of non-pressure containing components

Table C-5 Construction summary table – installation

Table no. Table description

C-15 Pre-installation survey and preparation of pipeline route

C-16 Qualification of construction spread and installation equipment

C-17 Qualification of welding, NDT, coating, procedures and personnel

C-18 Pipe storage yard

C-19 Inspection of excavation activities

C-20 Inspection of stringing operation

C-21 Inspection of cold bending operation

C-22 Pipe string welding

C-23 Pipe string lowering to trench

C-24 Backfilling

C-25 Pre-commissioning and commissioning

Table C-6 Steel making


Low Medium High

Initial activity

1. Review quality management system documents R1 R1 R2

2. Quality system audit at relevant manufacturers and sub-suppliers. - A A

3. Review of specifications and procedures R1 R1 R2

4. Technical meeting/kick-off meeting and review of manufacturingdocuments R1 R1 R2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

5. Verify the performance and testing during the procedure andpersonnel qualification testing - X X

Inspection activities

6. Material source for iron ore and related certificates - - R1

7. Steel making and slab casting S1 S1 S3

8. Slab inspection macro, non-metallic inclusion quality surveillance - S1 S2

9. Slab identifications heat number - S1 S2

10. Chemical analysis (ladle) - S1 S2

Final activities

11. Review of manufacturing and testing records R1 R1 R2

12. Issue of DNV GL close-out report X X X

Table C-7 Coil and plate rolling


Low Medium High

Initial activity





5. Verify the performance and testing during the procedure andpersonnel qualification testing X X X


6. Slab re-heating, rolling and accelerated cooling processes S1 S2 S3

7. Coil opening operation - S1 S2

8. Coil flattening operation - S1 S2

9. Welding coil to coil butt ends for continuity - S1 S2

10.Automatic ultrasonic inspection

Calibration of equipment- S1 S2

11.Automatic ultrasonic re-test inspection

Manual ultrasonic inspection- S1 S2

12. Visual inspection S1 S1 S3

13. Identification of test coupons - S1 S2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

Final activities



Table C-8 Linepipe production


Low Medium High

Initial activities


2. Quality system audit at relevant manufacturers and sub-suppliers - A A





6. Material identification (pipe list) and tracking S1 S2 S3

7. Check pipe-forming and bevel S1 S2 S3

8. Coil flattening operation S1 S2 S3

9. Welding coil to coil butt ends S1 S2 S3

10. Welding and consumable handling - S1 S2

11. Pipe forming operation S1 S2 S3

12. Continuous tack welding of the formed pipe S1 S2 S3

13. Continuous internal welding S1 S2 S3

14. Continuous external welding S1 S2 S3

15. Pipe end cutting operation - S1 S2

16. End bevelling station S1 S2

17. Weld repairs - S1 S2

18. View and interpret X-rays of repairs S1 S2 S3

19. Expanding, review record of expansion ratio - S1 S2

20. Check calibration of gauge R1 R1 R2

21. Hydrostatic test S1 S2 S3

22. End facing and squareness - S1 S2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

23. View and interpret X-rays of pipe ends S1 S2 S3

24. Calibration of UT equipment R1 R1 R2

25. Automatic ultrasonic on pipe (longitudinal and transverse) S1 S2 S3

26. MT - Equipment and sensitivity check R1 R1 R2

27. NDT - For pipe ends S1 S2 S3

28. MT - After repair of pipe body by grinding S1 S2 S3

29. Dye penetrant - check procedures R1 R2 R2

30. Dye penetrant - for pipe ends S1 S2 S3

31. Dye penetrant - after repair of pipe body by grinding S1 S2 S3

32. Wall thickness measurement after repair by grinding S1 S2 S3

33. Manual ultrasonic of pipe ends - calibration of equipment R1 R1 R2

34. Manual ultrasonic of pipe ends - ultrasonic inspection of pipe-end(circumference). Both 90° and angle probes shall be used S1 S2 S3

35. Dimensional inspection as per specification S1 S2 S3

36. Visual external inspection, including cleanliness of inside pipe body S1 S2 S3

37. Weighing of pipe - S1 S3

38. Bevel protectors (if required) - S1 S3

39. Marking - check tracking records, Die stamp weld bevel, Paint markinternal, colour code external S1 S2 S3

40. Storage of finished pipes - S1 S2

41. Cutting and identification of test coupons S1 S1 S2

42. Mechanical testing of production test pieces S1 S2 S3

43. Check chemical analysis R1 R1 R2

Final activities



Note:Table C-8 defines the scope of work for the quality surveillance of welded linepipe production. However, it may be used forseamless linepipe by omitting all items related to the welding and NDT of the longitudinal seam

---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---


DNV GL AS

Table C-9 Loading and handling operations


Low Medium High

Initial activities





4. Loading and handling operations at manufacturer - S1 S2

5. Transportation vessels, trucks, etc. (Suitability and capacity) - - S1

6. Loading operations in port - S1 S2

Final activities

7. Review of manufacturing, testing records and pipe tally sheet R1 R1 R2


Table C-10 Coating application (internal or external)


Low Medium High

Initial activities







6. Testing of coating materials R1 R1 R2

7. Qualification test S1 S2 S3

8. Receiving and storage of pipes in coating yard and review of piperecords - S1 S2

9. Examination of pipe prior to surface preparation S1 S2 S3

10. Quarantining the rejected pipes for repair or rejection - S1 S2

11. Recycling of repairable line pipe - S1 S2

12. Handling of rejected pipes S2 S1 S2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

13. Examination of grit - S1 S2

14. Pre-treatment - temperature, steel temperature humidity during pre-treatment, surface condition - S1 S2

15.Visual inspection after blast-cleaning for cleaning standard, roughness,surface imperfections, contamination as dust and chlorides,cleanliness, segregation, repair and re-instalment of rejected pipes

S1 S2 S3

16. Coating application - temperature, steel temperature humidity duringapplication, surface condition - S1 S2

17. Curing conditions - S1 S2

18. Coating thickness measurements and holiday tests S1 S2 S3

19. Coating cutback S1 S2 S3

20. Acceptance of panel testings R1 R1 R2

21. Final inspection and marking of coated pipes S1 S2 S3

22. Repairs to coating S1 S2 S3

23. Storage and handling of coated pipes - S1 S2

Final activities

24. Review of fabrication records R1 R1 R2

25. Review of testing records R1 R2 R2


Table C-11 Insulating joint fabrication


Low Medium High

Initial activities






Inspection

6. Selection of chemical composition for carbon steel, and other materials(if applicable) - S1 S2

7. Forging and heat treatment S1 S2 S3


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

8. Machining - S1 S2


10. NDT S1 S2 S3



13. Hydraulic fatigue testing - S1 S2

14. Electrical resistant test S1 S2 S3

15. Dielectric strength test S1 S2 S3

16. Coating thickness measurements and holiday tests S1 S2 S3

17. Visual inspection - S1 S2

18. Dimensional inspection as per specification. S1 S2 S3

19. Weighing of insulating joints - S1 S2

20. Marking - S1 S2

21. Storage of finished insulating joints - S1 S2

22. Removal and identification of test coupons S1 S2 S3

23. Mechanical testing of production test specimen S1 S2 S3

24. Check chemical analysis S1 S2 S3

25. Insulating joint conservation and storage - S1 S2

Final activities




Table C-12 Fabrication of pressure containing components


Low Medium High

Initial activity






DNV GL AS


Low Medium High



6. Material identification (material certificate) S1 S2 S3

7. Check pipe- forming (forging), heat treatment (Q/T) and machining S1 S2 S3


9. NDT S1 S2 S3



12. Dimensional inspection as per specification S1 S2 S3


14. Weighing of final product - S1 S2

15. Bevel protectors (if required) - S1 S2

16. Marking - check tracking records, dye stamp weld bevel, paint markinternal, colour code external etc. - S1 S2

17. Storage of final product - S1 S2




Final activities




Table C-13 Inspection of valves (and actuators) fabrication activities


Low Medium High

1. Inspection of chemical analysis - S1 S2

2. RT, UT, MT and PT of casting S1 S2 S3

3. MT and PT of machined parts, bevelled ends and bolting S1 S2 S3

4. PT of weld overlay S1 S2 S3

5. Forging and heat treatment S1 S2 S3

6. Material certificate checking S1 S1 S2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High


8. Hydrogen-induced cracked tests where NACE requirement is specified. S1 S2 S3

9. Inspection of non-metallic parts i.e., seals, o-rings and gaskets againstrelevant certificates - R1 R2

10. End flange connections S1 S2 S3

11. Calibration of testing equipment - R1 R2

12. Impact and hardness testing S1 S2 S3

13. Hydrostatic testing of shell and seats S1 S2 S3

14. Inspection of connection for vents, drains, pressure relief, andlubricant injection S1 S2 S3

15. Inspection of hand wheels, levers, locking devices and limit switches S1 S2 S3

16. Visual and dimensional inspection S1 S2 S3

17. Coating S1 S2 S3

18. Lifting arrangements S1 S2 S3

19. Marking - S1 S2

20. Valve functional testing S1 S2 S3

21. Actuator and valve assembly functional testing S1 S2 S3

22. Preservation and storage - S1 S2

23. Shipment - S1 S2

Final activities


Table C-14 Fabrication of non-pressure containing components


Low Medium High

Initial activity








DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

6. Material identification (material certificate) S1 S2 S3


8. NDT S1 S2 S3

9. Dimensional inspection as per specification. S1 S2 S3


11. Weighing of final product - S1 S2

12. Marking - check tracking records, dye stamp weld bevel, paint markinternal, colour code external etc. - S1 S2

13. Storage of final product - S1 S2




Final activities

17. Review of fabrication records I R1 R1

18. Review of testing records I R1 R1


Table C-15 Pre-installation engineering survey and preparation of pipeline route


Low Medium High

Initial activity


2. Quality system audit at relevant manufacturers and sub-suppliers - - A






DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

6.

Pre-installation survey:

— Route staking— Installation of benchmarks at specified distances along the route— Record of existing pipelines, cables, structures and features within

the specified corridor— Topographic survey with the specified grid resolution— Soil investigations, penetration tests and bore hole drilling at

specified intervals along the pipeline corridor— Soil mechanic tests at laboratory— Water table measurements— Soil temperature, salinity and resistivity measurements

S1 S2 S3

7.

Ground preparations:

— Verify permission has been granted by all relevant Authorities forpipeline to be laid

— Setting up of the base camp and pipe yards— Pre-lay survey— Construction of temporary access road— Right of way preparation, removal of obstacles and ground

levelling— Top soil strip operations in agricultural lands— Cordoning off the right of way in populated areas

S1 S1 S1

8.

Crossings/tunnels:

— Extent of preparation— Preparation method and procedures— Crossing preparations survey

- S1 S1

9.

Preparations for offshore approach:

— Extent of preparation— Preparation method and procedures— Landfall preparations survey— Onshore preparations survey

- S1 S1

Final activities

10. Review of survey reports R1 R1 R2


Table C-16 Qualification of construction spread and installation equipment


Low Medium High

Initial activity




DNV GL AS


Low Medium High





6. Handling, hauling, lifting, stringing, and storing equipment - S1 S2

7. Handling pipe repair equipment - R1 R2

8. Cold bend equipment - S1 S2

9. Backfilling equipment R1 R1 R2

10. Special crossings equipment - S1 S2

11. Pre-commissioning equipment - S1 S2

12. Pump station, tank farm, and terminal construction R1 R1 R2

13. Assembly of piping components - S1 S2

14. Welding machines R1 R1 R2

15. NDT equipment:

— qualification programme R1 R1 R2

— detailed system description and operation manual R1 R1 R2

— NDT procedure and reporting levels proposed for the qualificationprogramme

- S1 S2

— sound velocity measurements (material from all plate mills) - S1 S2

— calibration block(s) dimensions and tolerances - S1 S2

— welding of test welds with defects and RT/UT to confirm presenceof defects

- S1 S2

— scanning of repair test welds - S1 S2

— NDT report and selection of areas to be sectioned - S1 S2

— sectioning and defect height/length/location determination R1 R2 R2

— statistical treatment of data and the defect sizing error determined R1 R2 R2

— proposed threshold levels R1 R2 R2

Final activities

16. Review of reports and documentation R1 R1 R1



DNV GL AS

Table C-17 Qualification of welding, NDT, coating, procedures and personnel


Low Medium High

Initial activity







6. Qualification of welding procedure (including repair):

— WPS + WPAR R1 R2 R2

— Welding equipment type and identification - S1 S2

— Base material identification and certificates R1 R2 R2

— Bevelling and bevel shape - S1 S2

— Line-up and fit-up - S1 S2

— Excavation and grinding of repair welds - S1 S2

— Welding consumables identification and certificates, re-cycling ofwelding flux, mixture of new and re-cycled welding flux

- S1 S2

— Preheat and interpass temperatures - S1 S2

— Recording and control of welding parameters - S1 S2

— NDT of test welds S1 S2 S3

— Removal and identification of test pieces S1 S2 S3

— Mechanical testing S1 S2 S3

7. Review of NDT procedures:

— Final AUT procedure R1 R2 R2

— Manual UT procedures R1 R2 R2

— RT procedures R1 R1 R2

— MT procedures R1 R1 R2

8. Qualification of field joint coating procedures:

— Procedure R1 R1 R2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

— Identification of materials - S1 S2

— Surface preparation - S1 S2

— Application of coating - S1 S2

— Testing of coating S1 S2 S3

9. Qualification of external coating repair procedure:





— Testing of coating repair S1 S2 S3

10. Qualification of internal coating repair procedure:





— Testing of coating repair S1 S2 S3

11. Welders’ qualification/verification records R1 R2 R2

12. Welding inspectors’ qualification/verification records R1 R2 R2

13. NDT operators qualification/ verification records R1 R2 R2

Final activities



Table C-18 Pipe storage yard


Low Medium High

Initial activity





DNV GL AS


Low Medium High




6. Pipe transportation from coating yard to construction site storageyardPipe trackingPipe load out condition - S1 S2

7. Inspection of pipes and key products at assembly yards before loadout for transportation:

— Pipe stacking heights in accordance with specification - S1 S2

— Pipe ends for damage and end protectors - S1 S2

— Condition of coating, degradation and damage - S1 S2

— Pipe identification legible, complete and correct - S1 S2

— Marking and proper segregation/quarantine of rejected pipe - S1 S2

— “Repaired pipe” and “rejected pipe” records R1 R1 R2

— Internal cleanliness of pipe during storage and prior to shipping - S1 S2

— Verification, documentation and status of pipes in tracking system R1 R1 R2

— Storage condition for key products and welding consumables - S1 S2

8. Cargo manifest, pipe tracking floppy disk and pipe prior to shipping:

— Consistency between cargo manifest and pipe tracking disk - S1 S2

— No rejected or un-repaired pipes included S1 S1 S2

— Pipe identification correct and legible - S1 S2

— Pipe quantity correct - S1 S2

— Conditions of pipes acceptable to specification - S1 S2

9. Receiving inspection of pipe returned from onshore:

— Segregation of returned pipe S1 S1 S2

— Confirmation of reported reason for rejection - S1 S2

— Inspection for any further damage - S1 S2

— Determine if pipe is repairable - S1 S2

— Marking of pipe as reject or repair - S1 S2

— Entry of rejected pipe in “rejected pipe” records and pipe trackingsystem

- - X


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

10. Storage of repairable pipe in storage area:

— Storage in segregated area - S1 S2

— Storage conditions for pipe to be repaired - S1 S2

— Maintenance of “repair” marking - S1 S2

11. Repair of repairable pipe:

— Repair according to accepted procedures S1 S1 S2

— Documentation of repair - S1 S2

— Acceptability of repair - S1 S2

— Correction of “repair” marking - S1 S2

— Correction of status for repaired pipe in the pipe tracking system - - X

Final activities



Table C-19 Inspection of excavation activities


Low Medium High

1. Trench centre line coordinates according to the latest route plan S1 S2 S3

2. Diversion of the existing drainage according to its procedure - S1 S2

3. Trench profile according to trench drawing - S1 S2

4. Handling of the excavated material according to constructionspecification - S1 S2

5. Trench dewatering system operation and maintenance according to itsprocedure S1 S2 S3

6. Trench bedding material according to construction specification - S1 S2

7. Bell hole locations and profiles - S1 S2

Final activities


Note:Excavation equipment to be inspected as per Table C-16.

---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---


DNV GL AS

Table C-20 Inspection of stringing operation


Low Medium High

1. Pipe transportation from storage yard to installation location accordingto the procedure - S1 S2

2.Allowable length of pipes strings along the trench, their distance fromtrench and from each other, pipe elevation from ground and pipesupports

- S1 S2

3. Pipe tracking records updates - S1 S2

Final activities


Note:Pipe handling\lifting equipment to be inspected as per Table C-16.

---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---

Table C-21 Inspection of cold bending operation


Low Medium High

1. Pipe transportation from storage yard to bending work shop as per thebend list - S1 S2

2. Pipe handling, coating and pipe ovality checks prior to bending - S1 S2

3. Pipe feeding in to machine and seam weld orientation - S1 S2

4. Bending rate - S1 S2

5. Coating condition, gauge plate test, wrinkles, bend angle and radiuschecks S1 S2 S3

6. Rejected bends process according to its procedure - S1 S2

7. Bend load out and transportation to installation site - S1 S2

Final activities


Note:Bending machine to be inspected as per Table C-16.

---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---


DNV GL AS

Table C-22 Pipe string welding


Low Medium High

Initial activity







6. All major equipment is available and ready for use R1 R1 R2

7. All procedures for use during welding and NDT operations areaccepted R1 R1 R2

8. Valid verification for welding inspection and NDT personnel R1 R1 R2

9. Pipe receiving inspection and storage:

— Pipe identification legible, complete and correct - S1 S2

— Identification of pipe against certificates - S1 S2

— Identification of welding consumables - S1 S2

10. Receipt of welding consumables and key products:

— Condition acceptable according to specification, packagingundamaged

- S1 S2

— Identification and verification of welding consumables - S1 S2

— Storage conditions for welding consumables - S1 S2

11. Bevelling, cleaning, line-up and welding at welding stations:

— Bevelling and bevel shape - S1 S2

— Internal cleaning - S1 S2

— Line-up and fit-up - S1 S2

— Welding consumables identification, re-cycling of welding flux,mixture of new and re-cycled welding flux (where required)

- S1 S2

— Welding procedures, control of welding parameters S1 S1 S2

— Pipe tracking system entries - - S1

12. Non-destructive testing:


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

— Calibration blocks - S1 S2

— Equipment calibration - S1 S2

— Scanning - S1 S2

— Interpretation of indications - S1 S2

— Called repairs, location, defect type S1 S1 S2

— Documentation filing - S1 S2

— Equipment maintenance - S1 S2

13. Excavation, welding and NDT of repairs:

— Excavation length and depth, grinding - S1 S2

— NDT of excavation - S1 S2

— Welding consumables identification - S1 S2

— Welding procedures, control of welding parameters - S1 S2

— NDT of repairs S1 S1 S2

14. Production tests:

— Welding of production tests - S1 S2

— NDT of production tests - S1 S2

15. Field joint coating:

— Material and procedure - S1 S2

— Testing of field joint coating - S1 S2

— Confirm filed joint coating integrity after installation (applies toHDD)

S1 S1 S2

16. Pipe tracking – recording of data - - X

Final activities




DNV GL AS

Table C-23 Pipe string lowering to trench


Low Medium High

1. Side-booms\lifting machines arrangements - S1 S2

2. Lifting and lowering operations S1 S1 S2

3. Pipeline position in the trench S1 S1 S2

4. Welding of the pipe string ends and open ends protection caps S1 S2 S3

5. Connection of temporary CP system - - S1

6. Anchor blocking where required - S1 S2

Final activities


Note: Side-booms\lifting machines to be inspected as per Table C-16.

Table C-24 Backfilling


Low Medium High

Initial activity







6. Backfilling operations - S1 S2

7. Soil compaction - S1 S2

8. Removing and transportation of the unused excavations intodesignated areas - - S1

9. Right of cleaning ad soil reinstatement - S1 S2

Final activities




DNV GL AS

Table C-25 Pre-commissioning and commissioning


Low Medium High

Initial activity







6. Installation of temporary\permanent pig traps - S1 S2

7. Cleaning and gauging pigs - S1 S2

8. Pump and compressor spread - S1 S2

9. Pipe filling, cleaning and gauging operations - S1 S2

10. System pressure test:

— Water sampling - S1 S2

— Inhibitors - S1 S2

— Water filling - S1 S2

— Instrumentation and equipment calibration R1 R1 R2

— Air contents measurements - S1 S2

— Pressurisation - S1 S2

— Pressure test/holding S1 S1 S2

— Depressurisation - S1 S2

— Dewatering and drying - S1 S2

11. Golden welds S2 S3

12. Connection of permanent CP system, CP test and adjustments - S1 S2

13. Interface connection checks - S1 S2

14. Vent and flare systems - S1 S2

15. Valve operation tests - S1 S2

16. Filling of product - S1 S2

17. Start-up inspection


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

— Leak detection system - S1 S2

— SCADA system operation

— Controls and protective equipment - S1 S2

— Emergency plan - S1 S2

— Inspection pigging where specified S1 S2 S3

Final activities



C.6 Operations

C.6.1 General

C.6.1.1 No tables are provided for the operation phase. The project specific scope of work for verificationshould be agreed between the customer and DNV GL.

C.7 Environmental impacts

C.7.1 General

C.7.1.1 Environmental impacts associated with key onshore pipeline design, construction and operationactivities along with mitigation measures shall be verified based on site visits and documentation review.

C.7.1.2 Table C-26 gives a summary of the scope of work regarding environmental impacts associated toonshore pipeline construction activities.

Table C-26 Environmental impact


Low Medium High

Concept

Environmental and social impact assessments (ESIA)

1. Check that ESIA have been carried out R2 R2 R2

2. Check that ESIA recommendations for mitigation measures have beenimplemented R2 R2 R2

3. Documentation is in place for environmental management plans whererequired by the ESIA R1 R2 R2

Design


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

Pipeline route selection

4. ESIA have been carried out, including local consultation, and ESIArecommendations have been taken into account during route selection R2 R2 R2

Construction

Access and clearing

5. Topsoil has been appropriately managed R1 R2 R2

6. Erosion and sediment control structures have been installed asrequired S1 S2 S3

7. Contaminated soils have been exposed, and identify whether soiltreatment/isolation has been carried out S1 S2 S2

8. Site specific watercourse crossing techniques and management plansare in place based on local environmental sensitivities S1 S2 S2

9.Where a pipeline passes through sensitive environmental areas, checkwhether site specific environmental management procedures havebeen adopted and implemented

- A A

10. Clearing or grading activities are scheduled to minimise the timebetween initial clearing and rehabilitation - S1 S2

11. Existing roads and tracks have been used where practicable I R2 R2

12. Rehabilitation of cleared areas has been carried out in conjunction withan ecologist - A A

13. Appropriate weed and pathogen hygiene measures have been applied,if necessary, in problem areas to prevent spreading S1 S1 S2

14. Archaeological survey and visual amenity studies have been carriedout prior to construction R1 R1 R2

15. Noise monitoring survey has been carried out and proposed mitigationmeasures have been adopted - S1 S1

16. Air quality study has been carried out and proposed mitigationmeasures adopted for dust minimisation - S2 S2

17. Relevant equipment such as dust stabilisers or water damping asappropriate have been specified where required - S2 S2

Pipe stringing or welding

18. Regular dust monitoring and damping is carried out in accordance withenvironmental management procedures - R2 R2


20. Gaps have been allowed during pipe stringing for wildlife corridors, ifrecommended by an ecologist - A A

21. Procedures are in place to minimise risk of fire from welding S1 S2 S2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

22. Chemicals associated with radiography of pipeline weld are adequatelystored and disposed S1 S2 S2

23. Waste materials are managed appropriately in accordance with awaste plan S1 S2 S2

Trenching

24. Erosion and sediment control structures as required are in place S1 S2 S3

25. Trench spoil has not been permitted to mix with stockpiled topsoil andvegetation

- S1 S1

26. The length of time trench is open or pipe is exposed has beenminimised.

- - S2

27. Mitigation measures are in place to prevent wildlife access across theopen trench

- A A

28. Backfill has commenced immediately following pipe lay - - S2

29. Blasting or boring operations plan has been developed andimplemented to mitigate environmental impacts from blasting

S1 S1 S1

Directional drilling

30. Waste has been managed appropriately in accordance with a wasteplan S1 S2 S2


32. Environmental impacts from increased workforce have been minimised - R1 R2

Pipe laying and backfilling

33. Top soil protection and erosion prevention measures have beenadopted as required R1 R2 R2

34. Monitoring of discharge water quality has been carried out andappropriate discharge options identified S2 S2 S3

35. Trench blocks have been used if required and compaction of soil hasbeen carried out if required - S1 S1

36. Potential impacts on migratory patterns of species have beenconsidered for above ground pipes - I R1

37. Adequate management systems are in place for solid, liquid andhazardous wastes following backfilling S1 S1 S2

Construction camps and storage facilities

38. The environmental impacts of building construction have beenminimised A A A

Commissioning

Hydrostatic testing


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

39. Water used for hydrotesting is discharged under an environment(waste discharge) permit or equivalent S1 S1 S1

40. Appropriate treatment methods are adopted prior to discharge S1 S1 S1

41. Resource availability study has been carried out to identify andmitigate any third party deprivation - R1 R2

42. Measures are in place to avoid transfer of species from one catchmentto another A A A

Pigging and gas venting

43. An appropriate emissions assessment has been carried out if gasventing is required S1 S2 S2


45. Leakage monitoring is carried out to detect gas leakage S2 S3 S3

Operation

Pipeline maintenance

46. Access related impacts have been minimised S1 S1 S1

47.Erosion and sediment controls are installed in accordance with bestpractice and measures are in place for routine checks, particularly atwatercourse crossings

S1 S1 S1


C.8 Third party safety impact assessment

C.8.1 General

C.8.1.1 The requirements for 3rd party safety impact assessments (3PSIA) of onshore pipelines dependon the local regulatory regime and the operator’s internal risk management requirements. They can varyfrom qualitative assessment through to full quantitative risk analysis (QRA). Many Activities summarizedin the Table C-27 below should be undertaken irrespective of the requirements. Specific requirements forverification of 3PSIAs are included as a single activity and are worded either to be applicable irrespective ofthe requirements for a 3PSIA or else to be clearly applicable only to a certain type or certain types of 3PSIA.

C.8.1.2 A qualitative 3PSIA would typically include a hazard identification (HAZID) study, which shouldidentify all planned risk control measures (sometimes referred to as “barriers” – physical and procedural)and may recommend additional risk control measures. Risk ranking (expert judgment-based assessment oflikelihood and impact, in broad categories) would typically be included as part of this.

C.8.1.3 Where quantitative analysis is required, this may involve numerical modelling of the consequencesof a loss of containment incident and may further involve calculation of numerical values of risk (combiningfrequency estimates with the consequence modelling results). In some regulatory regimes, however (e.g.UK), separation distances have previously been established for natural gas pipelines: conformance to these isdeemed to meet the applicable risk criteria.


DNV GL AS

C.8.1.4 Table C-27 gives a summary of the scope of work table included in this section various onshorepipeline construction activities regarding 3PSIA.

Table C-27 3rd party safety impacts (3PSIA)


Low Medium High

Concept

Regulatory requirements

1. Regulatory requirements for 3PSIA have been identified andappropriate studies commissioned R1 R2 R2

Design

Pipeline route selection

2. 3PSIA has been carried out and route has been selected to minimizeoverall 3PSI R1 R2 R2

3. Local consultation has been carried out and conclusions have beenaddressed in route planning R1 R1 R1

4. Sensitive areas (e.g. schools, hospitals) have been identified andtaken into account in route planning R2 R2 R2

5.3rd party activities above or in the vicinity of the pipeline (e.g.agricultural activities such as ploughing) that could cause immediatepipeline damage have been identified

R1 R2 R2

6. Activities (e.g. road traffic on route crossing pipeline) that could causepipeline degradation have been identified R1 R2 R2

7.3rd party activities in the vicinity of the pipeline that could causeescalation of an initial incident (e.g. ignition of flammable gas) havebeen identified

R1 R2 R2

8. Potential safety impacts of pipeline construction activities on 3rdparties have been identified R1 R2 R2

9. Influence of material density, topography and barriers on loss ofcontainment events established and understood R1 R2 R2

10. Emergency access e.g. to section valves available R2 R2 R2

Design factors

11.Suitable design factors applied throughout pipeline route, in particularat vulnerable locations such as road crossings, and basis for selectiondocumented

R1 R2 R2

Protection against impact

12. Appropriate burial depths have been specified along the entire pipelineroute R1 R2 R2

13. Protection above (e.g. concrete slabs) has been considered andspecified as and where appropriate R1 R1 R2

14. Culverting of the pipeline at road/rail crossings has been considered R1 R2 R2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

Ground movement

15.Potential magnitude of seismic activity along pipeline route has beenevaluated and pipeline designed to maintain integrity in credibleseismic events

R1 R2 R2

16.Potential for landslip has been evaluated along pipeline route andstabilization of ground specified where evaluation identifies it isrequired

R1 R2 R2

Incident control

17. Detecting loss of containment reviewed and implemented if practical R1 R2 R2

18. Raising alarm to emergency services local to incident implemented R1 R2 R2

19. Minimizing released inventory R1 R2 R2

Process design

20. Operating envelope has been defined and documented R1 R2 R2

3PSIA

21. Suitable hazard identification study carried out, including identificationof planned risk controls R1 R2 R2

22. Appropriate failure scenarios have been assessed/modelled (for arange of sizes and release directions) R1 R2 R2

23.Appropriate modelling (if used) of physical features of each releasescenario (released material, size, direction, isolation, pipelinedepressurization) has been applied

R1 R2 R2

24. Qualitative understanding of potential consequences of each releasescenario is demonstrated R1 R2 R2

25. Qualitative understanding of 3PSI of consequences of each releasescenario is demonstrated R1 R2 R2

26. Local meteorological data (weather conditions, wind direction) hasbeen used R1 R2 R2

27. Recognized models (if models used) have been used for consequencesof each release scenario R1 R2 R2

28. All credible outcomes of each release scenario have been modelled (ifmodels used) R1 R2 R2

29. If risk based 3PSIA used: suitable spacing of scenarios along pipelinehas been used R1 R2 R2

30.If risk based 3PSIA used: modelling of entire route, of appropriaterepresentative sections, or of an appropriate combination of the two,has been applied

R1 R2 R2

31. If risk based approach adopted, appropriate risk criteria have beenapplied R1 R2 R2


DNV GL AS


Low Medium High

32.If risk based 3PSIA used: dominant scenarios and outcomes (largestrisk contributors), for both individual and societal risk, have beenidentified

R1 R2 R2

33. Uncertainties in quantitative results have been estimated R1 R2 R2

34.Locations where quantitative models may not fully represent 3PSI(e.g. due to topography) have been identified and their effect on 3PSIdiscussed

- A A

Construction

Pipeline route

35. Pipeline route clearly marked S1 S2 S2

Commissioning

Incident control

36. Detecting loss of containment S1 S1 S1

37. Raising alarm to emergency services local to incident operational S1 S1 S1

38. Minimizing released inventory S1 S1 S1

39. Pipeline route marks clearly visible A A A


Cha

nges

– h

isto

ric


DNV GL AS

CHANGES – HISTORICThere are currently no historical changes for this document.

About DNV GLDriven by our purpose of safeguarding life, property and the environment, DNV GL enablesorganizations to advance the safety and sustainability of their business. We provide classification,technical assurance, software and independent expert advisory services to the maritime, oil & gasand energy industries. We also provide certification services to customers across a wide rangeof industries. Operating in more than 100 countries, our experts are dedicated to helping ourcustomers make the world safer, smarter and greener.

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

dnvgl-se-0471 verification of onshore pipelines

Documents