DNV Se 0080

This copy of the document is intended for use by jaap jonker only. Downloaded 2024-01-12.
No further distribution shall be made.

SERVICE SPECIFICATION
DNV-SE-0080 Edition June 2020

Amended September 2021
Noble Denton marine services – marine

warranty survey
The content of this service document is the subject of intellectual property rights reserved by DNV AS (“DNV”). The user
accepts that it is prohibited by anyone else but DNV and/or its licensees to offer and/or perform classification, certification
and/or verification services, including the issuance of certificates and/or declarations of conformity, wholly or partly, on the
basis of and/or pursuant to this document whether free of charge or chargeable, without DNV’s prior written consent. DNV
is not responsible for the consequences arising from any use of this document by others.
The PDF electronic version of this document available at the DNV website dnv.com is the official version. If there
are any inconsistencies between the PDF version and any other available version, the PDF version shall prevail.
DNV AS
This copy of the document is intended for use by jaap jonker only. Downloaded 2024-01-12. No further distribution shall be made.
FOREWORD
DNV service specifications contain procedural requirements for obtaining and retaining certificates
and other conformity statements to the objects, personnel, organisations and/or operations in
question.
© DNV AS June 2020
Any comments may be sent by e-mail to rules@dnv.com
This service document has been prepared based on available knowledge, technology and/or information at the time of issuance of this
document. The use of this document by other parties than DNV is at the user's sole risk. DNV does not accept any liability or responsibility
for loss or damages resulting from any use of this document.
CHANGES – CURRENT
Changes - current
This document supersedes the October 2019 edition of DNVGL-SE-0080.
The numbering and/or title of items containing changes is highlighted in red.
Amendments September 2021
Topic Reference Description
Rebranding to DNV All This document has been revised due to the rebranding of DNV
GL to DNV. The following have been updated: the company
name, material and certificate designations, and references to
other documents in the DNV portfolio. Some of the documents
referred to may not yet have been rebranded. If so, please see
the relevant DNV GL document. No technical content has been
changed.
Changes June 2020
Remote survey [2.8] New subsection describing the use of remote survey as an
alternative to physical attendance including relevant conditions.
Cyber risk [2.9.5] New clauses stating the exclusion of cyber risk as part of the
standard scope for MWS.
Editorial corrections
In addition to the above stated changes, editorial corrections may have been made.
Service specification — DNV-SE-0080. Edition June 2020, amended September 2021 Page 3
Noble Denton marine services – marine warranty survey
DNV AS
CONTENTS
Contents
Changes – current.................................................................................................. 3
Section 1 Introduction............................................................................................ 5
1.1 Introduction......................................................................................5
1.2 Objective...........................................................................................5
1.3 Scope................................................................................................ 5
1.4 Application........................................................................................ 5
1.5 References........................................................................................ 5
1.6 Definitions and abbreviations........................................................... 6
Section 2 Marine warranty survey services.............................................................8

2.1 General............................................................................................. 8
2.2 Role of the marine warranty surveyor.............................................. 8
2.3 DNV marine warranty surveyor approval and related activities.........9
2.4 Certificate of approval.................................................................... 10
2.5 Statement of acceptability.............................................................. 11
2.6 Scope of work leading to an approval............................................ 12
2.7 Risk based marine warranty survey............................................... 12
2.8 Remote survey................................................................................14
2.9 Limitations of approval................................................................... 14
2.10 Repetitive and unattended operations.......................................... 17
Section 3 Technical and practical requirements.................................................... 19

3.1 General........................................................................................... 19
3.2 Technical requirements...................................................................19
3.3 Documentation requirements..........................................................20
Appendix A Supporting documents....................................................................... 21

A.1 General........................................................................................... 21
A.2 Legacy DNV document set.............................................................. 21
A.3 Legacy GL Noble Denton guidelines................................................22
Appendix B Code basis and environmental loading............................................... 24

B.1 General........................................................................................... 24
B.2 Default motion criteria................................................................... 24
B.3 Friction allowance when computing seafastening loads..................24
Changes – historic................................................................................................ 25
DNV AS
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
DNV Noble Denton marine services has been at the forefront in defining marine warranty surveyor (MWS)
services to support the marine insurance industry in reducing incidents and losses due to marine operations
since the early 1960s. The fundamental objective of MWS is to make reasonable endeavours to ensure that
the risks associated with the warranted operations to which a marine warranty surveyor (MWS) is appointed
are reduced to an acceptable level in accordance with best industry practice.
The MWS service and associated marine operations are supported by industry best practice, guidelines
and technical requirements as documented in DNV's marine warranty standards DNV-ST-N001 and DNV-
ST-N002 referenced herein and made available through the DNV Veracity platform. These documents may
also be used as desired for non-MWS purposes, e.g. for activities such as inspection, oversight or owner's
representative.
1.2 Objective
This document describes the process used by DNV Noble Denton marine services when providing MWS
services to evaluate whether a marine operation can be accepted for the purposes of insurance-related MWS.
1.3 Scope
This document describes the MWS process. It does not include guidelines and technical requirements which
are included in standards DNV-ST-N001 and DNV-ST-N002.
1.4 Application
The MWS service described in this document is applicable for both project and mobile offshore drilling unit/
mobile offshore unit (MODU/MOU) marine operations.
1.5 References
Table 1-1 Normative references
Reference Title
DNV-ST-N001 Marine operations and marine warranty
DNV-ST-N002 Site specific assessment of mobile offshore units for marine warranty
JRyyyy-xxx Codes of practice, scopes of work, initial screening procedures as published by

(publication year/sequence number) the Joint Rig Committee of Lloyd's Market Association
DNV AS
1.6 Definitions and abbreviations
1.6.1 Definition of verbal forms

Table 1-2 Definition of verbal forms
Term Definition
shall verbal form used to indicate requirements strictly to be followed in order to conform to the document
should verbal form used to indicate that among different possibilities one is recommended as particularly suitable,
without mentioning or excluding others
may verbal form used to indicate a course of action permissible within the limits of the document
1.6.2 Abbreviations
Table 1-3 Abbreviations
Abbreviation Description
ASD/WSD allowable stress design/working stress design
CoA certificate of approval
EPCI engineering, procurement, construction and installation
HAZID hazard identification analysis
HAZOP hazard and operability study
HLV heavy lift vessel
JRC joint rig committee
LRFD load resistance factor design
MWS marine warranty survey
MDR master document register
MOC management of change
MODU mobile offshore drilling unit
MOU mobile offshore unit
MWS marine warranty survey
NDT non-destructive testing
OIM offshore installation manager
PQP project quality plan
RP recommended practice
SoA statement of acceptability
SoW scope of work
DNV AS
TLP tension-leg platform
VMO Veritas Marine Operations (legacy DNV now part of DNV Noble Denton marine services)
DNV AS
SECTION 2 MARINE WARRANTY SURVEY SERVICES
2.1 General
2.1.1
This section provides an overview of the approach taken by DNV Noble Denton marine services when
providing MWS services that are intended to result in a certificate of approval (CoA) for a marine operation
for the purposes of marine insurance warranty.
2.1.2
In cases where document approval is required, a statement of acceptability (SoA) may be issued.
2.1.3
The marine warranty surveyor's role is described together with the CoA and the steps necessary to achieve
the issue of a CoA or SoA.
2.1.4
For the purposes of this document, DNV is the legal entity, trading under the DNV name, which is contracted
to carry out the scope of work and issues a certificate of approval, a statement of acceptability, or provides
advice, recommendations or design input as a consultancy service.
2.1.5
This document is applicable where either DNV-ST-N001 or DNV-ST-N002 are used as the basis for the design
and planning. For projects started prior to DNV-ST-N001 or DNV-ST-N002 then either the legacy DNV or GL
Noble Denton legacy set may be used in which case the December 2015 edition of this document shall be
used. Other standard(s) for the design and planning may be acceptable provided they meet the requirements
of [3.2].
2.1.6
MWS services will be delivered by personnel with the abilities required by DNV competence scheme and who
are either part of DNV Noble Denton marine services or acting on their behalf.
2.2 Role of the marine warranty surveyor
2.2.1
An insurance warranty is a clause in the insurance policy for a particular marine project, requiring the
approval of one or more marine operations by marine warranty surveyors from a specified independent
survey house, or one from a list of such survey houses. In most cases the assured employs the survey house
though occasionally an insurance broker or the underwriters may do so. As an alternative, the assured can
delegate employment of the survey house to the engineering, procurement, construction and installation
(EPCI) contractor.
DNV AS
2.2.2
The requirement of the insurance warranty clause is normally satisfied through the issuance of one or more
certificates of approval. Responsibility for interpreting the terms of the warranty so that an appropriate scope
of work can be defined rests with the assured who may be the operator, owner or the owner's contractor.
The scope may include acceptance of procedures and equipment in advance of the issue of the certificates of
approval and may also be extended to cover consultancy work as described in [2.3].
2.2.3
The surveyor usually attends during an operation to monitor the operations and review any changes in
procedures. In these cases the surveyor has no executive authority on the project, but when necessary
shall submit proposals to the assured’s representative to ensure that the project is run in a safe and proper
manner, see [2.4.5].
Note:
The surveyor may approve changes in procedures if within their capabilities, e.g. procedural changes may require updated
document review or engineering calculations. In general, procedural changes shall follow project specific management of change
procedures as applicable.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.3 DNV marine warranty surveyor approval and related activities
2.3.1
DNV marine warranty survey approval may be sought where a marine operation is the subject of an
insurance warranty clause, or where an independent third party review covering an equivalent scope is
required e.g. for self-insured operations.
2.3.2
DNV may also undertake other complementary roles that are not necessarily mutually exclusive to the MWS
role, e.g. for self-insurance operations, or where a demonstrable level of independent assurance is required.
2.3.3
Services that are fully complimentary to the MWS scope include:
— on-hire/off-hire condition surveys related to the charter of vessels
— vessel audits
— vessel suitability surveys
— verification of aspects of a project that are not addressed, or not addressed in detail, by the MWS scope.
2.3.4
Other activities such as marine advisor or consultant (providing advice, recommendations, calculations and/
or design input) could give rise to potential conflicts of interest where the submissions for MWS approval are
developed by DNV as part of the scope. In such cases, it is normal practice that these are under the control
of separate line management and it is required that the client makes the appropriate disclosures to, and
obtains acceptance from, underwriters.
DNV AS
2.3.5
If the scope of work requires an individual warranty surveyor to approve his or her own work, e.g. as
towmaster, this is only possible when the client has obtained the underwriters' acceptance prior to the work
commencing.
2.3.6
rd
As part of the overall project risk management processes, stakeholders may apply a range of independent 3
party assurance or validation processes, such as independent design/construction verification, classification/
statutory certification and/or offshore shelf state compliance processes e.g. safety case.
The extent of assurance given by such a processes, can provide valuable input into the marine warranty
process, and as such due consideration should be given to said processes when evaluating the required scope
under MWS. This holistic approach to marine warranty will be clearly documented within the project quality
plan (PQP) and agreed with the relevant project stakeholders.
2.4 Certificate of approval
2.4.1
A certificate of approval (CoA) is the formal document issued by the warranty surveyor when, in his or her
judgement and opinion, all reasonable checks, preparations and precautions have been taken to keep risks
within acceptable limits (see Sec.3), and an operation may proceed or a unit is suitable for operations at
a location. It is the main deliverable of the approval process. A signed copy of the CoA is returned to the
warranty surveyor to acknowledge receipt.
2.4.2
The CoA for a marine operation such as float-out, towage or installation will normally be issued when:
— all relevant documentation has been reviewed and accepted
— preparations on site and on vessel(s) involved have been satisfactorily carried out
— marine equipment has been surveyed and found acceptable
— a readiness meeting has been held
— the weather conditions and forecast weather are suitable for the operation to begin and, for weather
restricted operations the forecast weather window is sufficient.
Agreement is required on the end-point of each certificate of approval. The end-point shall be a safe
condition or when the CoA for a subsequent operation is issued. A safe condition is one where the object is
considered to be exposed to a normal level of risk of damage or loss (the risk is similar to the risk expected
for the in-place condition).
Note:
Unless specified otherwise in the CoA, a towage to a safe haven is deemed to be complete when it reaches the planned destination.
However, the CoA ceases to apply when the approved tug(s) is/are disconnected and released from further activity (apart from
when bunkering).
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.4.3
Normally a pre-installation CoA for an MOU location will be issued in advance of the installation operation
and usually include requirements for pre-installation activities such as debris surveys. They will normally be
DNV AS
issued when all necessary site data has been reviewed and a site specific assessment has shown the MOU
structure and foundations or stationkeeping system are suitable for operations at the proposed site.
Note:
For jack-ups, a full site specific assessment may not be required when one of the following alternative approaches shows
acceptability. Comparison of the key parameters for the proposed operation against:
a) operating curves for the unit and considered acceptable by DNV Noble Denton marine services
b) limiting criteria given in the approved operations manual where these are considered acceptable by DNV Noble Denton
marine services
c) known cases that are considered acceptable by DNV Noble Denton marine services.
As a minimum the referenced capabilities for metocean data, weight and CoG, leg length below hull, foundation fixity, and
assessment code should be similar or more onerous.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
Once the key site-specific assessment assumptions are confirmed post-installation by the MOU (master,
offshore installation manager (OIM), etc.) or by an attending surveyor, the final certificate will be issued. If
the key assumptions are not confirmed then further evaluation will be undertaken to determine whether a
final certificate can be issued, and to establish any related limitations or mitigations.
Note:
Whilst a final CoA may be issued without surveyor attendance, such attendance can be required by the client and/or the
underwriter. When the location presents unusual challenges, DNV Noble Denton marine services may propose that a surveyor
attend.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
Location CoA's address the installed situation only and do not address the marine operations for installing or
removing an MOU from location.
Note:
In the event that an installation has not proceeded as expected e.g. there was a punch-through, DNV Noble Denton marine
services are well-placed to offer assistance in mitigating such issues.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.4.4
The warranty surveyor may be unable to issue a CoA due to inadequate procedures or equipment for the
likely conditions.
2.4.5
Similarly, failure to follow the procedures, conditions and requirements in the certificate of approval could
lead to it being withdrawn prior to the point of no-return, or to the issue of a non-conformance notice after
the point of no-return. The non-conformance may be withdrawn if justified by remedial actions.
Any change/amendment to the procedures should be managed by a management of change (MOC) process
and a new CoA issued as stated in [2.2.3].
In the event of a loss, the lack of a valid CoA means that the insurance warranty provisions are not met. This
could invalidate related aspects of the insurance policy and prevent or reduce payment by underwriters for
any loss.
2.5 Statement of acceptability

A statement of acceptability (SoA) may be issued when the client requires documentary proof that DNV has
completed the necessary reviews of procedures and supporting calculations and that subject to any stated
limitations on the statement of acceptability, the procedures are considered acceptable. No surveys or site
DNV AS
checks are required for a statement of acceptability. A statement of acceptability covers only the acceptability
of the submitted documents. It does not imply approval of any proposed operation.
Note:
A statement of acceptability can be considered equivalent to an approval in principle.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.6 Scope of work leading to an approval
2.6.1 General
The overall requirements of the scope of work (SoW) are usually set out in the insurance warranty clause
or a document referenced from it. The scope can be dependent on the level of risk that the underwriters
perceive to be associated with the particular operation. Details may be added in the contract scope to ensure
that the requirements of both the client and DNV are satisfied. The SoW typically includes:
— document reviews of engineering calculations, project plans and operations procedures
— for dry tows by barge or heavy lift vessel (HLV) transportation of jack-ups, semi-submersible and
submersible MODUs, as per SoW4 in JR2019-005 (previously JR2016-012), independent verification of
stability and motion responses, and derivation of sea-fastening and cribbing loads
— meeting attendance
— participation in risk identification and reduction activities such as HAZIDs and HAZOPs
— surveys of the structure and equipment to be used (including vessels)
— review of equipment certificates, statutory documentation, etc.
— surveys to verify that satisfactory preparations have been made
— issuance of a certificate of approval
— attendance to witness critical operations.
Note:
Early involvement of DNV is recommended (normally at the initial planning or design stage) to ensure acceptability and success of
the marine operation as this will often save the time and expense of changing designs after construction has started.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.6.2
The technical criteria that are used to ensure acceptable risk levels are given in Sec.3.
2.7 Risk based marine warranty survey
2.7.1
Risk based MWS considers the criticality of all documentation and surveys within the SoW with regards to
their impact on keeping the operation risk within acceptable limits. Based on the criticality, an applicable
level of MWS involvement will be selected. If the criticality is higher, the level of MWS involvement is
increased. Conversely, if the criticality is lower, the level of MWS activities may be reduced without reducing
effectiveness in assuring an acceptable risk level.
DNV AS
Note:
For a general but complete description of the risk based approach, see DNV-SE-0474.
The advantages for DNV’s customers in applying a risk based MWS approach includes:
— reduced probability of undesirable events

— improved availability and reliability for critical operations
— cost and time savings through avoiding undue attention to areas and activities that are low contributors to risk
— contributing to optimised expenditure in high risk areas
— early involvement in projects to ensure correct decisions and minimal rework
— a demonstrable and auditable case for safety and project core values, for (project) partners, underwriters and other
stakeholders
— further support of a project's interface management
— project high level oversight rather than focus on individual elements.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.7.2
The level of MWS involvement is typically categorised as low, medium or high.
Low is applied when the risks to the operation are lower than average. For example it is located in benign
environmental conditions, a robust well known operation type and/or the contractor is experienced in the
execution of similar operations. This level may also be appropriate when a high level of verification and/or
quality assurance work has been performed.
Medium is the default level and is applied to the majority of assets.
High is the level applied when the risks to the operation are higher than average. For example, it is in
adverse environmental conditions, it is technically innovative and/or the contractor isn't well experienced in
the execution of of similar operations.
Note:
Figure 2-1 illustrates the levels as a function of probability and consequence of failure.
Figure 2-1 Levels of involvement
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
DNV AS
2.7.3
The premise for the risk based verification will be further detailed in the DNV PQP (project quality plan) for
the project.
2.8 Remote survey
2.8.1
For operations requiring an attending surveyor as described herein, see e.g. [2.4.3], [2.6.1] and [2.9.4.3],
the attendance may be substituted or supported by remote survey.
2.8.2
The decision to apply remote survey shall be made taking into account the risk profile of the operation and
any restrictions on the remote survey approach, e.g. bandwidth constraints, reduced situational awareness.
2.8.3
The remote survey methodology shall be agreed with the client and appropriate contractors/subcontractors.
The client shall obtain the underwriters' acceptance of using remote survey prior to commencing the
operation.
2.9 Limitations of approval
2.9.1 General
2.9.1.1 CoA’s are issued subject to specific limitations, which are included in the wording. Some of these are
specific to the type of marine operation under consideration. The limitations include as described in [2.9.1.2]
to [2.9.1.9].
2.9.1.2 A CoA is issued for a particular towage, voyage or operation only and is not to be deemed or
considered to be a general statement of seaworthiness of vessels.
2.9.1.3 A CoA is issued based on external conditions observed by the attending surveyor of the structure,
hull(s), machinery and equipment, without removal, exposure or testing of parts.
2.9.1.4 Any alterations to the surveyed items or agreed procedures after issue of the certificate of approval
may render the certificate invalid unless the changes are accepted by DNV in writing. Any changes to the
agreed procedure should be submitted through a management of change system. This should include a risk
assessment and all information relevant to demonstrate the acceptability of the change.
2.9.1.5 No responsibility is accepted by DNV for the way in which a transportation is conducted after
departure, or for the way in which an operation is conducted after commencement, this being solely the
responsibility of the appropriate manager, master or superintendent.
Note:
When in attendance, the DNV MWS will bring any known deviations from the approved procedures to the attention of the client's
representative.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
DNV AS
2.9.1.6 The CoA covers the surveyed items within the agreed scope of work only. It does not, for instance,
cover any other cargo on board a vessel or barge, or any damage to the surveyed cargo as a consequence of
inadequacy of any other cargo or its seafastenings, unless specifically included in the scope of work.
2.9.1.7 The CoA for any operation does not cover any moorings used:
— prior to the start of a transportation or operation
— at any intermediate shelter port or arrival port
— after completion of a transportation or operation
unless specifically approved by DNV. If approval of moorings is required, other than for the operation itself,
specific approval should be requested.
2.9.1.8 A CoA for installation applies to the safety of the structure and associated equipment during the
defined installation period. It does not imply that the completed jacket, platform or other installation will be
fit for purpose.
2.9.1.9 The safety of personnel will not be specifically addressed unless our client requests this and the
detailed requirements are included in the scope of work.
2.9.2 Piracy
In accordance with underwriter requirements, DNV will check that an anti-piracy plan exists for voyages
through at-risk areas but will not verify the suitability of the plan, unless required to do so by the
underwriters. Nevertheless, masters are advised to carefully consider their route and the risks presented
before implementing all necessary measures in due time to reduce the likelihood of their vessel becoming a
target.
Note:
The anti-piracy plan should be developed as part of the passage planning process taking into account previously reported incidents
of piracy. DNV’s Noble Denton marine services is available to assist with risk analysis and guidance.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.9.3 Structural fatigue

2.9.3.1 General
Fatigue damage that could jeopardize the safety of a marine operation should normally be considered.
However, DNV Noble Denton marine services' approval will include fatigue damage verification only when
specifically included in the scope of work agreed with the client, see [2.2.2].
Fatigue shall be considered for project cargoes, including those for upstream construction. It is often not
practicable to assess the tow/transportation fatigue of MOUs (due to lack of knowledge of past history as well
as the often limited time-frame available).
If fatigue is included in the warranty clause and it cannot be addressed, then the client should advise the
underwriters accordingly.
DNV AS
Note:
The rig moves and upstream construction scopes of work as described in by the Joint Rig Committee of the Lloyds Market
rd
Association (JR2019-005 and JR2019-006 respectively, both dated 3 September 2019) include the following:
1) Upstream construction:
— Scope of work 2 - fixed platform transportation, review and approval of:

grillage, seafastening, cribbing and lashing design, including fatigue design considerations (incl. NDT requirements).
— Scope of work 3 - floating structures, review and approval of:
structural strength. MWS to perform risk assessment of potential fatigue damage from transportation and installation
phases and based on this determine if independent verification of the project’s fatigue assessments for these phases is
required and report findings to underwriters for a decision to be made.
2) Rig move:
— Scope of work 2: wet tows of jack-up rig. Review and approval of:
(B) Tow: In the case of a long wet tow assess the allowable leg bending moments /leg length and fatigue considerations.
— Scope of work 4: dry tows by barge or HLV transportation of MOUs. Review and approval of:
(H) Allowable leg bending moments /leg length and fatigue considerations.
This scope of work description includes a Note (ii) which is similar to the note as included in [2.9.3.2] of this document.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.9.3.2 Voyages
For existing structures and MOUs where there is no fatigue analysis to demonstrate sufficient remaining
fatigue life, a thorough NDT inspection of fatigue-critical areas shall be undertaken and the results submitted
together with the details of repairs to any defects that were detected.
Note:
For jack-ups an inspection programme, including NDT, is required if the unit has previously been subject to one or more
transoceanic voyages and there has been no subsequent recent detailed inspection of the fatigue-critical areas. Typically, the
inspection should include, as appropriate, the areas of legs from just below the lower guides to two (2) bays above the upper
guides, with the legs in any proposed voyage condition. It should also include the guide connections, the jack-house connections
to the deck and connections of the spudcans or mudmats to the leg chords. Newbuild MOUs should normally have been verified for
fatigue for the initial delivery voyage.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
2.9.3.3 Jack-ups on location

When a jack-up is intended to operate for a long period in water depths such that the same leg sections are
within or near the guides, the effects of fatigue shall be considered for the legs in way of the hull and in the
splash zone as well as for the leg to spudcan or leg to mat connection.
Note:
This is to meet the requirements in clause 11.3.1 of ISO 19905-1:2016.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
The effects of fatigue damage will be excluded from any certificate of approval for a location issued by DNV
Noble Denton marine services unless specific instructions are received from the client, see [2.9.3.1].
2.9.4 Location approvals

2.9.4.1 The pre-installation CoA for the location will be issued on satisfactory review of the proposed
installed situation confirming suitability of the unit to survive at the location for the intended mode of
operation and the activity specific operating limits and/or storm survival criteria, based on the information
provided, see also [2.4.3].
2.9.4.2 DNV Noble Denton marine services can provide assurance by performing a 'real time' spudcan
penetration analysis during geotechnical site investigations. Note that DNV Noble Denton marine services can
DNV AS
only confirm that a borehole has been progressed to sufficient depth on the basis of calculations performed
by DNV Noble Denton marine services for the particular jack-up unit(s) being assessed.
2.9.4.3 After installation of a mobile unit subject to MWS, an installation report shall be presented to DNV
Noble Denton marine services confirming the installation is in accordance with the assumptions made for the
preliminary CoA for the location.
For moored units, the following information shall be presented (usually in the form of a master’s report):
— Final position of the unit and bearing.
— Mooring proof loading, see DNV-ST-N001 [17.9.2].
— Position and bearing of the anchors and final clearance with subsea assets.
— Final position of the subsea-buoys if employed for clearances.
— Make up of each mooring line.
— As-built chain map and identification numbers of all the components.
— Certificates of all the components.
— Summary of any deviations from the approved arrangements, and validation of the arrangement with the
deviations for the location.
For bottom-founded units, the following information shall be presented:
— Final position of the unit and bearing, ideally the coordinates of each leg (where applicable).
— Load-penetration behaviour, including initial penetrations under dead-load and the final penetrations.
— Final air gap above chart-datum (where applicable).
— Summary of any deviations from the approved arrangements, and validation of the arrangement with the
deviations for the location.
The final CoA for the location of an MOU will be issued by DNV Noble Denton marine services upon receiving
and accepting the as-installed information listed above. For quayside and inshore locations, it is mandatory
that a DNV Noble Denton marine services surveyor attends to issue the final CoA for the location.
2.9.5 Cyber risk

2.9.5.1 General
Unless specifically included in the contractual scope and mentioned in the resulting CoA, cyber-risks, both
malicious and non-malicious, (e.g. malicious code, computer virus, unauthorised access) that can affect
the operation by causing the failure, error or malfunction of any computer, computer system, computer
software programme, code, or process or any other electronic system are not included in the standard
marine warranty scope as described herein.
2.9.5.2 Extended scope

Cyber risk may be covered by an extended marine warranty scope on request.
Guidance note:
For more information and guidance on the topic, see:
— DNV-RP-G108 Cyber security in the oil and gas industry based on IEC 62443
— DNV-RP-0496 Cyber security resilience management for ships and mobile offshore units in operation.
---e-n-d---o-f---g-u-i-d-a-n-c-e---n-o-t-e---
2.10 Repetitive and unattended operations
2.10.1
Unless specified by the insurance warranty or client, attendance by a marine warranty surveyor is normally
not required for all repeats of identical operation provided DNV is kept informed of any variations, problems
DNV AS
and potential problems. The attendances shall be agreed at the start of each project and will typically
include:
a) the first unique event
b) after significant changes in procedures or personnel for the operations
c) after change of vessel
d) after change of person in charge or OIM
e) an additional 10% of randomly selected repetitive operations
f) after any incident.
2.10.2
Certificates of approval for any towage or transport, for which a DNV Noble Denton marine services' surveyor
does not attend the departure, will normally be issued in advance after the vessel(s) (including barges/MOUs
etc.) and towing vessel(s) have been surveyed. Agreement to commence such voyages will be given by email
or other means after the actual departure weather and weather forecast have been reviewed and deemed to
be acceptable by the relevant DNV office.
2.10.3
DNV may require progress reporting for unattended operations, towages and transports e.g. daily or at
specified milestones.
2.10.4
When required, statements of acceptability for unattended lifts, load-outs or other operations will normally
be issued in advance , provided the procedures and calculations have been accepted and no surveys or site
checks are required. See [2.5].
DNV AS
SECTION 3 TECHNICAL AND PRACTICAL REQUIREMENTS
3.1 General
3.1.1
Normally, the technical and practical requirements discussed in [3.2.1] will be used as the basis for assessing
the acceptability of an operation or location. However, other standards may be acceptable, see [3.2.2].
3.1.2
Operation and/or project-specific deviations from the standard criteria can sometimes be justified using risk
assessments, provided that DNV agrees that the results are acceptable. When such risk assessments, despite
mitigation actions, show that the risk levels are increased relative to those inherent in the standard criteria,
the operation may be approved subject to disclosure by the client to, and agreement by, the underwriters.
Note:
A new risk assessment is required for each proposed deviation.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
3.1.3
A structural assessment of an innovative structure and/or material cargo during temporary stages may not
always be available for review by DNV Noble Denton marine services due to confidentiality concerns. In
such cases, after agreement with the underwriters and the client, DNV Noble Denton marine services may
accept an official document from the designer stating maximum allowable loads from the seafastenings and
allowable accelerations for the structure/cargo to keep within allowable stresses during voyage or installation.
Alternatively, one of the parties may confirm that they will take responsibility in case of damage during load-
out, voyage or installation.
Note:
If the design of the wind turbine blades is highly confidential and the client, manufacturer or designer is unwilling to submit
transport or handling calculations then this approach can be taken.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
Alternatively, DNV Noble Denton marine services may accept a statement from the certifying authority
that the structure can safely withstand the required accelerations and loads for the load-out, voyage and
installation provided that the load paths and allowable local forces for seafastening, lifting or load-out forces
are given.
3.2 Technical requirements
3.2.1 DNV’s marine warranty standards

DNV has set the industry standard for marine operations and marine assurance activities for the last 50
years. Our collective industry best practice and guidance documentation is referenced and used by a large
proportion of clients and competitors alike all over the world. An overview of the legacy documents is in
App.A and key features of their harmonisations are discussed in App.B.
This knowledge and experience has enabled us to develop our standards:
— DNV-ST-N001 Marine operations and marine warranty
— DNV-ST-N002 Site specific assessment of mobile offshore units for marine warranty.
DNV AS
In general, technical and practical requirements outlined in these two documents are directly applicable to
marine assurance and/or advisory activities. They are also taken as the default in the absence of alternative
client requirements for both assurance and advisory services.
3.2.2 Other industry codes

Other industry codes may be used in place of the above documents provided that they can be shown to
achieve similar levels of safety.
3.3 Documentation requirements
3.3.1 General
The document review in the agreed SoW shall cover the required documentation as listed in the applicable
sections of DNV-ST-N001 and DNV-ST-N002.
3.3.2 Project specific overview

At the start of a project, DNV will supply a project specific list of required documentation based on the type
of asset(s) and operation(s). Like the content of DNV-ST-N001 and DNV-ST-N002, the list will be developed
to ensure the JRC guidelines are covered. The advantages of adopting this approach are:
— confidence that the scope of the marine warranty clause is covered
— clear overview of the required documentation
— control of the status and progress of the verification process.
If there is an existing project master document register (MDR), then DNV will map this to the list of required
documents to identify which documents are required for review and whether any information is likely to be
missing.
DNV AS
APPENDIX A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
A.1 General
The legacy document sets described below formed the basis for the development of DNV-ST-N001 and DNV-
ST-N002 (exception: 0021/ND which is replaced by DNV-SE-0122).
A.2 Legacy DNV document set

The main content in the legacy DNV offshore standards for marine operations (also known as VMO standards)
is shown below.
— DNV-OS-H101 – Marine Operations, General – The content is general requirements and recommendations
for planning, preparations and performance of marine operations. Requirements to temporary mooring
systems, stability, guide systems and vessels are included.
— DNV-OS-H102 – Marine Operations, Design and Fabrication – The content is general requirements and
recommendations for selection of loads, design (verification) and fabrication of structures involved in
marine operations.
— DNV-OS-H201– Load Transfer Operations – The content is specific requirements and recommendations
for marine operations involving load transfer without use of cranes, i.e. by use of (de)ballasting. Typical
load transfer operations are loadout, float-out, lift-off, float-over and mating. Construction afloat is also
covered.
— DNV-OS-H202 – Oct-15 – Sea Transport Operations – The content is specific requirements and
recommendations for sea transports operations. Typical operations are towing of barges, vessels and self-
floating objects as well as ship transportation of special cargoes.
— DNV-OS-H203 – Transit and Positioning of Offshore Units – The content is requirements and
recommendations for positioning any type of offshore unit such as: semi-submersible units, self-elevating
units, drilling ships, floating productions and/or storage units, loading buoys, offshore installation vessels,
and well intervention units. Transit of these units is also covered with additional requirements to DNV-OS-
H202.
— DNV-OS-H204 – Offshore Installation Operations – The content provides specific requirements and
recommendations mainly applicable for jacket installation operations. However, the principles and
requirements given in the standard may be adopted for the installation operations of other types of
objects.
— DNV-OS-H205 – Lifting Operations – The content is specific requirements and recommendations for well
controlled onshore-, inshore- and offshore lifting operations, both in air and sub-sea. For subsea lifts DNV-
OS-H206 gives additional requirements.
— DNV-OS-H206 – Subsea Operations – The content is specific requirements and recommendations for
loadout, transport and installation of subsea objects. Typical objects covered are subsea structures,
pipelines, umbilicals, bundles, cables, and risers.
Note:
The standards referred to applicable requirements in other DNV/DNV codes. The DNV standards have been revised to DNV. These
codes are:
— DNV-OS-C101 Design of offshore steel structures, general – LRFD method

— DNV-OS-C401 Fabrication and testing of offshore structures
— DNV-OS-E301 Positioning mooring
— DNV-ST-E407 Rope based deployment and recovery systems for designated service
— DNV-ST-F101 Submarine pipeline systems
— DNV-ST-F201 Riser systems
— DNV-ST-0378 Offshore and platform lifting appliances
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
DNV AS
A.3 Legacy GL Noble Denton guidelines
An overview of the legacy GL Noble Denton guidelines is given below.
— 0001/ND – General Guidelines for Marine Projects, Rev 1.1
These guidelines present material that is common to more than one of the other GL Noble Denton
guidelines for the approval of marine projects.
— 0009/ND – Guidelines for Site Specific Assessments of Jack-Ups, Rev 10.1
These guidelines are for the assessment of self-elevating platforms in the elevated condition. They
address:
— General feasibility studies, including optional checks for punch-through resistance and fatigue, such
studies may result in a statement of compliance.
— Assessment for specific locations, such studies may result in a certificate of approval.
— 0013/ND – Guidelines for Load-Outs, Rev 8.1
These guidelines are for the loadout of items including offshore jackets, SPAR sections, modules, bridges
and components from the shore onto floating or grounded barges and ships.
— 0015/ND – Concrete Offshore Gravity Structure Construction & Installation, Rev 5.1
These guidelines are for the marine aspects of construction, towage and installation of offshore concrete
gravity base structures (GBS) with a deck. They are intended to be applicable to deep draft structures,
where much of the construction work is carried out afloat, as well as shallower draft structures where the
construction of the GBS can be essentially completed in dry dock.
— 0016/ND – Seabed and Sub-seabed Data Required for Approvals of Mobile Offshore Units (MOU), Rev 8.1.
These guidelines describe the seabed and sub-seabed data required by to assess the suitability of
locations for independent leg and mat-supported jack-up units, other mobile units operating on the
seabed, and anchor installation and performance assessments for floating units.
— 0021/ND – Guidelines for the Approval of Towing Vessels, Rev 10 (replaced by DNV-SE-0122 Towing
vessels approvability scheme).
These guidelines are intended to lead to an approval by for entry into the GL Noble Denton Towing Vessel
Approvability Scheme. They also provide guidance for the approval of towing vessels for a specific tow and
bollard pull tests. They do not cover the towage of specific vessels or barges, guidance for which may be
found in 0030/ND.
— 0027/ND – Guidelines for Marine Lifting and Lowering Operations, Rev 11.2
These guidelines are for the design and approval of marine lifting operations, including subsea
installations (but excluding pipelines and flowlines).
— 0028/ND – Guidelines for Steel Jacket Transportation and Installation, Rev 6.2
These guidelines are for the design and approval of the transportation and installation of steel offshore
jacket structures.
— 0029/ND – Guidelines for Submarine Pipeline Installation, Rev 1
These guidelines is for the approval of pipeline installation by laying, pulling or towing, would be based.
— 0030/ND – Guidelines for Marine Transportations, Rev 6.1
These guidelines are used for approval of specialised marine transportations, including:
— cargoes on ships or towed barges
— towage of self-floating marine and oilfield equipment, civil engineering structures and ships
but are not normally intended to apply to 'standard' cargoes such as bulk liquids, bulk solids, refrigerated
cargoes, vehicles or containers.
DNV AS
— 0031/ND – Guidelines for Float-over Installations/Removals, Rev 3
These guidelines are for the approval of float-over installation or removal of structures onto or from a host
structure which may be:
— offshore pre-installed structures, e.g. jackets and concrete units, or
— offshore or inshore floating structures, e.g. TLPs, concrete units and semi-submersibles.
— 0032/ND – Guidelines for Moorings, Rev 2.1
These guidelines are used for the approval of moorings, including:
— offshore catenary or taut leg moorings of mobile offshore units (MOUs)
— offshore catenary or taut leg mooring of floating offshore installations (FOIs)
— inshore mooring of MOUs and FOIs, e.g. for stacking
— temporary mooring of offshore installations in an afloat condition during construction, installation or
decommissioning
— quayside mooring of MOUs and FOIs, e.g. during maintenance or conversion
— mooring of vessels during loadouts and installation operations.
— 0035/ND – Guidelines for Offshore Wind Farm Infrastructure Installation, Rev 1.1
These guidelines are for the approval of the installation of offshore wind farms of various types.
They mainly refer to other GL Noble Denton guidelines developed for similar operations, but provide
alternatives which may apply to offshore wind farm installations.
DNV AS
APPENDIX B CODE BASIS AND ENVIRONMENTAL LOADING
B.1 General
DNV-ST-N001 allows for either a load and resistance factor design (LRFD) or an allowable/working stress
design (ASD/WSD) approach. Alignment for load cases that include environmental loads has been achieved
by the different metocean criteria requirements for the two different approaches.
For weather-restricted operations, this has been done by using smaller alpha-factors for the ASD/WSD
approach compared to those required for LRFD. This means that to achieve a given limiting forecast
operational criteria, the design environmental condition needed for the ASD/WSD approach needs to be
higher than that for the LRFD approach. However, the resulting steel requirements are similar because for
the ASD/WSD approach, with the 1/3 increase in allowable stresses invoked, results in lower inherent safety
factors than the LRFD approach.
Note:
The safety factors are taken as the combined effect of the load and resistance factors for LRFD and the margin against yield
in ASD/WSD. It should be recognized that the alignment will never be perfect because the LRFD safety factors are dependent
on the environmental to gravity load ratio and also on whether the environmental loading is a linear or squared function of the
environmental parameters.
---e-n-d---o-f---n-o-t-e---
For weather unrestricted operations, the metocean return periods for the ASD/WSD approach are greater
than those required by the LRFD approach. Again, the resulting steel requirements are similar because for
the ASD/WSD approach, with the 1/3 increase in allowable stresses invoked, results in lower inherent safety
factors than the LRFD approach.
In other areas, some difference between the approaches remains including:
— default motion criteria
— friction allowance when computing seafastening loads.
These are discussed in the following subsections.
B.2 Default motion criteria

The default motion criteria differ. The criteria for the ASD/WSD approach address a wide range of vessels.
The basis for the criteria is empirical, however it has stood the test of time for unrestricted voyages world-
wide. The default criteria for the LRFD approach are more theoretically based, and they are often more
closely aligned with analytical results from standard analysis programs i.e. typically based on small-amplitude
theory and assumed damping, rather than on non-linear analysis that accounts for deck-edge immersion
and other effects. In the ASD/WSD approach to default motion criteria, friction is excluded when computing
lateral seafastening loads, whereas friction is permitted in the LRFD approach.
B.3 Friction allowance when computing seafastening loads

As discussed in [B.2], the ASD/WSD approach does not allow seafastening loads to be reduced by the
effects of friction when default vessel motions criteria are used. However, it is permissible to include the
effects when following the LRFD approach. When default motions criteria are not used and the motions are
calculated, both approaches allow friction to be taken into account. The friction coefficients differ, but so do
the permitted areas with which they are associated, so that in most cases the resulting force reduction is
similar.
DNV AS
CHANGES – HISTORIC
Changes – historic
October 2019 edition
Amendments April 2020

Only editorial corrections have been made.
Changes October 2019

General updates Sec.1 Restructured introduction section into subsections.
[2.2.1] Updated clause reflecting that the MWS is often selected by the
EPCI.
[2.2.3] Updated clause and added note to clarify how a surveyor may
approve changes during operation.
[2.3.6] New clause, further clarifying how our MWS service delivery
rd
may interact with other 3 party insurance roles and improve
efficiency and/ or effectiveness.
[2.4.5] Updated clause to improve understanding.
[2.5] Updated clause including a new note.
[2.8.3.2] Updated clause to improve understanding.
[2.8.3.3] Updated clause to improve understanding.
[2.9.1] Updated list.
[3.1.2] Moved clause originally in [2.6] and updated to improve

understanding.
[3.2] Restructured original [3.2] and [3.3] and merged into this
section.
App.A Updated appendix, making it more accurate and general.
Independent verification for [2.6.1] Updated list with new item specifically for dry tows in line with
MOU dry transport updated JRC guidelines.
[2.8.3.1] Included new note and updated second paragraph of clause in

line with updated JRC guidelines.
Developments on MWS service [2.7] New subsection defining risk based approach to MWS with some
delivery clauses based on DNVGL-SE-0474 and some updated already
existing clauses from [2.6].
[3.3] New subsection defining documentation requirements as an

element of our service delivery.
DNV AS
Changes – historic
November 2016 edition
Main changes November 2016
• General
— The whole document has been revised as the previous version referred to legacy entity documents that
have been superseded by the issuance of DNVGL-ST-N001 and DNVGL-ST-N002.
December 2015 edition

This is a new document.
DNV AS
About DNV
DNV is the independent expert in risk management and assurance, operating in more than 100
countries. Through its broad experience and deep expertise DNV advances safety and sustainable
performance, sets industry benchmarks, and inspires and invents solutions.
Whether assessing a new ship design, optimizing the performance of a wind farm, analyzing sensor
data from a gas pipeline or certifying a food company’s supply chain, DNV enables its customers and
their stakeholders to make critical decisions with confidence.
Driven by its purpose, to safeguard life, property, and the environment, DNV helps tackle the
challenges and global transformations facing its customers and the world today and is a trusted
voice for many of the world’s most successful and forward-thinking companies.
WHEN TRUST MATTERS

DNV Se 0080

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DNV Se 0080

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This copy of the document is intended for use by jaap jonker only. Downloaded 2024-01-12.

No further distribution shall be made.

DNV-SE-0080 Edition June 2020

Noble Denton marine services – marine

© DNV AS June 2020

Any comments may be sent by e-mail to rules@dnv.com

Amendments September 2021

Topic Reference Description

Changes June 2020

Topic Reference Description

Section 2 Marine warranty survey services.............................................................8

Section 3 Technical and practical requirements.................................................... 19

Appendix A Supporting documents....................................................................... 21

Appendix B Code basis and environmental loading............................................... 24

DNV-ST-N001 Marine operations and marine warranty

JRyyyy-xxx Codes of practice, scopes of work, initial screening procedures as published by

1.6.1 Definition of verbal forms

ASD/WSD allowable stress design/working stress design

CoA certificate of approval

EPCI engineering, procurement, construction and installation

HAZID hazard identification analysis

HAZOP hazard and operability study

HLV heavy lift vessel

JRC joint rig committee

LRFD load resistance factor design

MWS marine warranty survey

MDR master document register

MOC management of change

MODU mobile offshore drilling unit

MOU mobile offshore unit

MWS marine warranty survey

NDT non-destructive testing

OIM offshore installation manager

PQP project quality plan

SoA statement of acceptability

SoW scope of work

2.2 Role of the marine warranty surveyor

2.3 DNV marine warranty surveyor approval and related activities

2.4 Certificate of approval

2.5 Statement of acceptability

2.6 Scope of work leading to an approval

2.7 Risk based marine warranty survey

— reduced probability of undesirable events

Figure 2-1 Levels of involvement

2.8 Remote survey

2.9 Limitations of approval

2.9.3 Structural fatigue

— Scope of work 2 - fixed platform transportation, review and approval of:

2.9.3.3 Jack-ups on location

2.9.4 Location approvals

2.9.5 Cyber risk

2.9.5.2 Extended scope

2.10 Repetitive and unattended operations

3.2 Technical requirements

3.2.1 DNV’s marine warranty standards

3.2.2 Other industry codes

3.3 Documentation requirements

3.3.2 Project specific overview

A.2 Legacy DNV document set

— DNV-OS-C101 Design of offshore steel structures, general – LRFD method

B.2 Default motion criteria

B.3 Friction allowance when computing seafastening loads

Amendments April 2020