The electronic pdf versions of the documents found through http://www.dnv.com/ are the officially binding versions. Copyright Det Norske Veritas.

Expand Search

DNV-OSS-301 Certification and Verification of Pipelines

Sec.2: Principles of Risk-Differentiated Certification and Verification

SECTION 2
Principles of Risk-Differentiated
Certification and Verification

Sec.2
A. General

Sec.2
A 100   Objectives

Sec.2
B. Verification Principles

Sec.2
B 100   Purpose of verification

Sec.2
B 200   Verification as a complementary activity

Sec.2
B 300   Verification management

Sec.2
B 400   Risk-Differentiated Levels of Certification and Verification

Additionally, linepipe production from a well known mill may be considered low risk, whereas, production from an unknown mill may be considered high risk.

Sec.2 B
408   The level of certification can be reduced or increased during a phase if the originally chosen level is considered too rigorous or too lenient, as new information on the risks to the pipeline system becomes available.

Sec.2 B
409   Certification should be planned in close co-operation with the owner and each of its contractors, to provide a scope of work that is tailor-made to the schedule of each production process/activity, i.e. to make the verification activities, surveillance and hold points, an integrated activity and not a delaying activity.

Guidance note:
Many Contractors have adequate quality control systems and quality control departments, with competent personnel to perform, for example, inspection at mills and coating plants and specialist material engineers competent to review and verify the performance of mills.

In that case, all certification work need not be done by DNV personnel. Where applicable, the various inspections may be carried out by competent persons other than DNV personnel.

In that situation DNV's certification activities can be confined to:

-	reviewing the competence of the contractor's personnel
-	auditing their working methods and their performance of that work
-	reviewing the documents produced by them.

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

Sec.2
C. Selection of Level of Certification

Sec.2
C 100   Selection factors

Sec.2 C

Table 2-1 Levels of Certification - Summary of Involvement
Level	Description of involvement	Guidance for application on the level of involvement
Low	— Review of general principles and production systems during design and construction. — Review of principal design documents, construction procedures and qualification (e.g. MPQT) reports. — Visit-based attendance during system testing and start-up activities. — Less comprehensive involvement than level Medium.	— Proven pipeline designs with benign contents and/or installed in benign environmental conditions. — Straightforward pipelines designed and constructed by experienced contractors. — Low consequences of failure from a safety, environmental or commercial point of view. — Relaxed to normal completion schedule.
Medium	— Review of general principles and production systems during design and construction. — Detailed review of principal and other selected design documents with support of simplified independent analyses. — Full time attendance during (procedure) qualification (e.g. MPQT) and review of the resulting reports. — Visit-based or intermittent presence at site.	— Pipelines in moderate environmental conditions. — Projects with a moderate degree of novelty. — Medium consequences of failure a safety, environmental or commercial point of view. — Ordinary completion schedule.
High	— Review of general principles and production systems during design and construction. — Detailed review of most design documents with support of simplified and advanced independent analyses. — Full time attendance during (procedure) qualification (e.g. MPQT) and review of the resulting reports. — Full time presence at site for most activities. — More comprehensive involvement than level Medium.	— Innovative pipeline designs in extreme environmental conditions. — Projects with a high degree of novelty or large leaps in technology. — Inexperienced contractors or exceptionally tight completion schedule. — Very high consequences of failure a safety, environmental or commercial point of view.

Sec.2 C
102   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 its contractors.

Guidance note:
Each of these factors is addressed also in DNV-OS-F101 Section 2.B.

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

Fig. 1   Selection of the required level of certification

Sec.2
C 200   Overall safety objective

Sec.2
C 300   Assessment of risk

Guidance note:
Reasonable practicability

The term "as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP)" has come into use through the United Kingdom's "The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 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 and trouble of the measures to be taken to reduce the risk.

It follows, therefore, that the greater the risk the more reasonable it would be to incur substantial cost, time and effort in reducing that risk. Similarly, if the risk was very small it would not be reasonable to expect great expense or effort to be incurred in reducing it.

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

Sec.2
C 400   Technical innovation and contractor experience

Sec.2
C 500   Quality management systems

Guidance note:
Most organisations have quality management systems certified by an accredited third party certification body. However, when business increases, they expand their staff quickly by taking on contract personnel often for a fixed period or for the duration of a particular contract.

This influx of new personnel can lead to problems of control of both the whole organisation and of particular projects being undertaking. Quality problems may then occur, as these new personnel have no detailed knowledge of the organisation's business methods, its ethos or its working procedures.

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

Sec.2
D. Information Flow

Sec.2
D 100   Communication lines

Guidance note:
The recommendation springs from DNV's experience with projects where communications difficulties between the parties have jeopardised the issue of the pipeline certificate.

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

Fig. 2   Communication Lines

Sec.2
D 200   Obligations

Sec.2
D 300   Notification of certification level

Guidance note:
Frequently, ITTs contain one line stating ".... the contractor shall arrange 3rd party verification." The use of the information contained in the above paragraphs should assist the owner to specify the required level of certification more precisely.

On other occasions, certification is arranged by the owner but, in this case, it is important that contractors are informed of the level of certification planned.

The contractor's technical activities should not be affected greatly by the contractual arrangements, aside from whether or not the owner or the contractor assesses the required level of certification.

There will be a small administration workload regarding document control or meetings and discussions with the verifier but the contractor can plan what documents are need to be seen by the verifier using the information in this OSS. However, it is emphasised that the verifier should not need to review any document that the contractor would not produce normally when following the requirements of DNV-OS-F101.

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