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

[Book] [Expand] [Collapse] [Search Forms] [Previous Section with Hits] [Next Section with Hits] [Clear Search] [Help]

Expand Search

App.E: Generic Description of Project Sub-phases [Table of Contents]

DNV-OSS-305 Rules for Certification and Verification of Diving Systems

[-] App.F: Selection of Safety Objective

APPENDIX F
Selection of Safety Objective

App.F
A. General

App.F
A 100   General Principles

App.F A
101   The selection of the safety objective depends on the criticality of each of the elements that have an impact on the management of risks to the diving system.

App.F A
102   Certification shall direct greatest effort at those elements of the diving system where the risk is highest and whose failure or reduced performance will have the most significant impact on:
  1. safety risks
  2. environmental risks
  3. economic risks.


App.F A
103   Suitable selection factors include, but are not limited to, the:
  1. overall safety objectives for the diving system
  2. assessment of the risks associated with the diving and the measures taken to reduce these risks
  3. degree of technical innovation in the diving system
  4. experience of the contractors in carrying out the work
  5. quality management systems of the owner and its contractors.


App.F A
104   Due to the diversity of various diving systems, their contents, their degree of innovation, the geographic location, et cetera, it is not possible to give precise guidelines on how to decide what safety objective is appropriate for each particular diving system.

App.F A
105   Therefore, guidance is given as a series of questions that should be answered when deciding the appropriate safety objective for a diving system. This list is not exhaustive and other questions should be added to the list if appropriate for a particular diving system.

App.F A
106   It must be emphasised that the contribution of each element should be judged qualitatively and or quantitatively. Wherever possible quantified risk assessment data should use to provide a justifiable basis for any decisions made.

App.F A
107   Depending of the stage of the project, the activities may not have taken place yet in which case the questions can also be posed in another form, i.e. "Is .... planned to be?"

App.F
B. Trigger Questions

App.F
B 100   Overall Safety Objective

  1. Does the safety objective address the main safety goals?
  2. Does the safety objective establish acceptance criteria for the level of risk acceptable to the owner?
  3. Is this risk (depending on the diving and its location) measured in terms of human injuries as well as environmental, economic and political consequences?

App.F
B 200   Assessment of risk

  1. Has a systematic review been carried out to identify and evaluate the probabilities and consequences of failures in the diving system?
  2. 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?
  3. Does the extent of the review reflect the criticality of the diving system, the planned operation and previous experience with similar diving systems?
  4. Does this review identify the risk to the operation of the diving system and to the health and safety of personnel associated with it or in its vicinity?
  5. Has the extent of the identified risks been reduced to a level as low as reasonably practicable by means of one or both of:
  6. Reduction in the probability of failure?
  7. Mitigation of the consequences of failure?
  8. Has the result of the systematic review of the risks been measured against the owner's safety objective?
  9. Has the result of this review been used in the selection of the appropriate certification activity?

App.F
B 300   Technical Innovation

  1. Has the degree of technical innovation in the diving system been considered?
  2. Has it been considered that risks to the diving are likely to be greater with a high degree of technical innovation than with a diving designed, manufactured and installed to well-known criteria in well-known waters?
  3. Have factors been considered in the selection of the appropriate certification such as:
  4. Degree of difficulty in achieving technical requirements?
  5. Knowledge of similar diving systems?
  6. Effect of the new diving system on the area or vessel?

App.F
B 400   Contractors' Experience

  1. Has the degree of risk to the diving system been considered where design, construction or installation contractors are inexperienced?
  2. Has the degree of risk been considered where the contractors are experienced but not in similar work?
  3. Has the degree of risk been considered where the work schedule is tight?

App.F
B 500   Quality Management Systems

  1. Have all parties involved in the diving system implemented an adequate quality management system to ensure that gross errors in the work are limited?
  2. Do these parties include the:
    1. owner?
    2. Design contractor?
    3. Construction contractors?
    4. Installation contractor?
    5. Operator?
  3. Do the factors being considered when evaluating the adequacy of the quality management system include:
  4. Whether or not an ISO 9000 or equivalent certified system is in place?
    1. Results from external audits?
    2. Results from internal audits?
    3. Experience with contractors' previous work?
    4. Project work force familiarity with the quality management system?
App.E: Generic Description of Project Sub-phases [Table of Contents]