DNV Kick off Meeting

Chevron Jansz IO FCS

2022.06.23
CONTENTS

1. Project Overview

2. Regulatory Execution Plan

3. Area of Concern
Appendix
1. NOPSEMA Safety Case Approach 7. Lloyd Scope of Validation Work Process
2. NOPSEMA Validation 8. Australian Legislation Codes and Standards
3. Independent Validation Body Scope 9. Integrity Critical Elements
Compliance (Lloyd) 10. Dwg/Doc. Validation Review Process – Lloyd
4. Validation Scope 11. Survey Inspection
5. Validation / Verification Regulations 12. Validation/Self Verification Scope
6. Lloyd Scope of Work – Area of Concern

< 2 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 Project Key Milestones

 Engineering Key Milestones

No. Engineering Key Milestone Date Remark No. Engineering Key Milestone Date Remark
1 HAZID 20-Sep.-22 22-Sep-22 8 P&ID - IFC R1 6-Mar-23
2 3D Model Review - 30% 7-Oct-22 11-Oct-22 9 Primary Steel Stru. Dwg – IFC 15-Mar-23 10-Feb-23
3 HAZOP 12-Oct-22 14-Oct-22 10 Equipment List - IFC R1 20-Mar-23
4 P&ID - IFC 9-Dec-22 11 Overall Layout Drawing - IFC R1 31-Mar-23 27-Mar-23
5 Overall Layout Drawing – IFC 23-Dec-22 12 3D Model Review - 90% 25-Apr-23 26-Apr-23
6 Equipment List – IFC 03-Jan-23 13 Primary Steel Stru. Dwg- IFC R1 25-May-23 12-May-23
7 3D Model Review - 60% 20-Jan-23 26-Jan-23 14

*C/D : Commencement of Date *S/C : Steel Cutting *K/L : Keel Laying *L/O : Load Out *S/A : Sail Away *FCS : Field Control Station *PA : Provisional Acceptance
< 3 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 Engineering Responsibility Matrix
Detailed Engineering
Construction Follow-on
Area Up to Stage 3 Engineering Engineering
(90% Model / IFC) Stage 4
Hull Engineering DSME *Note1) DSME DSME
(Incl. Campaign Accommodation)
Locations DSME Okpo Engineering Center (OEC) *Note2)
Topsides Engineering Aker Solutions DSME DSME Aker Solutions
Aker Engineering Center
Locations DSME Okpo Engineering Center (OEC)
(AEC)*Note3)
Mooring System KBR
Locations Houston, USA

*Note 1 – Aker Engineering Center in Aker Solutions, Oslo, Norway (detail engineering for Global performance,
Main structures and Secondary structures)
*Note 2 – Okpo Engineering Center in DSME Okpo Yard, Korea
*Note 3 – Aker Engineering Center in Aker Solutions, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

< 4 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 DSME EPCT Engineering Organization Chart As of June 01,2022

< 5 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 Aker EPCT Organization Chart (1/2) As of June 01,2022

 PMT Team Project Sponsors

CHRIS WILLIAMS Legend :

Personnel in KL

Project Manager Personnel in Oslo

ARNIDA ARSAM

Sr Project Engineer Secretary

KRISHNA PADMAPRIA

Planning and Con- Eng. Manager – Hull

Business Manager Interface Manager Eng.Manager–Topside Sr Quality Eng’r IM Manager Regulatory Compli.
trol Manager BJARNE NAESS
SATVINDER SINGH GIRISHA RAHUL BHANAGAR ANU/ ROSLIZA FADZIL KADIR ANUAR KAMARUDIN
ARNIDA

Lead Planner
SP Admin
NAZWAN YANG
EIS
Change and Risk
Project Engineer Sr Planner
Engineer
IZZA FARHANA VIJAY SP Admin
MUHILAN Project Engineer EIS
AISHWARYA

Project Control E3D

JOSEPH WAN FAYZUL
Project Engineer
AFIQ

Cost Controller
NORSYAHIDA

Lead DCC
MAHADI

*EPCT : Engineering Perocurement Construction and Transportation *PMT : Project Management Team *KL : Kualar Lumpur
< 6 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 Aker EPCT Organization Chart (2/2) As of June 01,2022

 Engineering Team - Topsides Engineering Manager

Topside
RAHUL BHATNAGAR
Legend :

Personnel in KL
Project Engineer Project Engineer
AFIQ AISHWARYA

Process HVAC Mechanical Piping/Layout Electrical Instrument Structural Safety Architecture Telecom
Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Engineer Lead Architect Lead Engineer
AZHAR ALI WAQUAR MUK WAI KUEN GAWRAV AHMAD SHUKRI DIDIN WONG KAR HONG NAZREEN DZULKIFLI ZAINAL ABIDIN

Lead Material
Engineer Lead Designer
Dr LEE Lead Designer Lead Designer Lead Designer
MANISH
AZLEENDEEN AHMAD ZAKI MUHD SUFI
Weight Control
Lead Engineer
SITI NASHRAH

 Engineering Team – Hull Engineering Manager Legend :

Hull
Bjarne Naess Personnel in Oslo

Class Coordinator
TBN

Lead Naval Architect Lead Hull Structural

Gerhard Gundersen Stein L. Rasmussen

< 7 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 KBR EPCT Organization Chart As of June 01,2022

Project Manager
DSME Tobias Kärrsten Chevron
Mooring Lead Mooring Lead
Sungyul Kim Deputy PM Document Manager Xiaoyan Yan
Jaewook Kim Tirtharaj Bhaumik D’anne Ferrell Aifeng Yao
Project Controls QC Inspection
Michael Morrow John Dickmeyer
Interface Manager QA
Sungpil Ahn Harry Singh

Procurement Manager Mooring Engineering Manager

Janie Savell Blake Allen

Logistics Coordinator Expeditor Subject Matter Mooring Analyst Package Engineers On-Vessel Design Suction Pile Design
Talon Felts Experts
Pontus Mellgren Tirtharaj Bhaumik Dave Andersen Shila Basu
(multiple)

Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Fabricator
Package 1 Package 2 Package 3 Package 4 Package 5 Package 6 Package 7 Package 8 Package 9 Package 10

< 8 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 Overall Engineering Battery Limit

< 9 / 58 >
1. Project Overview
 Erection Sequence Reference Only
 Hull Erection Sequence  Topside Erection Sequence

< 10 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Regulatory Schedules Ongoing (Not final)
C/D (‘22.06.01)
Eng Start Topside S/C (‘23.11.27)
HAZOP
-1 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Feb June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
2022 2023

First Vendor Data Process: P&ID IFC

(GA,PID) (Approved)
DNV
regula- As-noted Vendor Data Batch-1 3D Model Turn
tory Set (GA,PID) Over
up
DNV Batch-2 3D Model Turn Over
KOM Start submissions

HAZOP Batch-3&4 3D Model Turn Over

DNV RFC

V/D Cut Off for 90% D/R

Topside Fabrication

Stage 4 Const. Eng.

DNV Review

*HAZOP : HAZardous Operability, *KOM : Kick Off Meeitng, *RFC : Request For Classification, *GA : General Arrangement, *V/D : Vendor, *D/R : Design Review
< 11 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Classification Requirement
 Reference in Scope of Work Exhibit A and Exhibit F-5
 DNV Certification - Delivery of the Facility duly certified by DnV as being compliant with the
following class notation:
 ✠ OI Column-Stabilized Offshore Support Unit, POSMOOR FMS (50).
• ✠ Constructed under supervision of DNV
• OI :The notation OI will be given to non-self-propelled offshore installations intended for long
term service at one offshore location with main structure, utility and safety systems found
to be in compliance with the basic (common) requirements of the applicable DNV GL
offshore standards referred to in the rules.
• Column-Stabilized Offshore Support Unit : A structure dependent on the buoyancy of widely
spaced columns for floatation and stability in all modes of operation.
• POSMOOR: Passive position mooring system according the technical requirements of
DnV-OS-E301 Ch.2
• FMS (50): Enhanced fatigue design, and construction for a 50 year design life.

< 12 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 POSMOOR
DNV GL RU-0101- Offshore Drilling and Support Units
DNV GL –OS-E301 – Position Mooring

< 13 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 FMS(50) Notation
FMS: Fatigue methodology for ship shaped Units
Fatigue life : 50 years
FMS : DNVGL-OS-C102 Ch.3 Sec.1 (2.1)

< 14 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Offshore Crane Notation – Optional
 Refer to extracted DNV-ST-0378 Sec.1
 To be checked if assembled crane is planned to have FAT at manufacturer site

 For Aker/ KBR , DNV Draft TQ can be sent to regulatory coordinator/Doc. Control. After of-
ficial issue DSME will inform to respective parties accordingly.

< 15 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 FEED DNV AIP

*AIP : Approval In Principle

< 16 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Major Classification Scope of Work

 Hull and main structure  Machinery installations and equipment

 Strength  Power generation
 Materials and welding  Position keeping
 Corrosion protection  Propulsion (as applicable)
 Constructional fire protection  Steering (if applicable)
 Weathertight and watertight integrity  Fire and flammable gas detection,
 Stability and floatability  Fire protection and extinguishing
 Tank arrangement  Drainage and bilge pumping
 Ballasting
 Emergency shutdown systems (as applica-
ble)

< 17 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Communication Protocol
Following persons to be in Copy of all Emails to Classification society incl. Access to Jansz IO FCS
Veracity Portal as below;
 Regulatory Manager - Abhilash Tiwari (abhilash@dsme.co.kr)
 Regulatory Coordinator – Seog-Won Lim (swlim@dsme.co.kr)
 Interface manager – Tae-Hee Kim (thkim6@dsme.co.kr)
 Doc. Controller - Jae-Kyung Lee (jklee@dsme.co.kr)
 Aker Regulatory Manager : Anuar Kamarudin (Mohamad.Anuar.Kamaruddin@akersolutions.com)
 KBR Project Controls : Michael Morrow (Machael.Morrow@kbr.com)

< 18 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Regular Meeting among DNV/DSME/Aker/KBR(if possible)
 Propose to have Biweekly meeting on Thursday (3PM(KST)/2PM(KL)/8AM(Oslo)/1AM(Houston-if
possible), from July 07-tentatively via MS TEAMS. Link will be shared by DSME to the relevant
all Parties.
 Agenda will be categorized and sent in advance to all Parties by Monday of that week.
 Only items which affects the design or need detail clarification will raised in the meeting.
 Only very urgent clarification request will be sent to DNV by email by DSME Regulatory.
 DSME Request DNV PMA to arrange suitable engineers during the Biweekly meeting on a call
basis to quick resolve the discipline queries.
 Items discussed during meeting will be captured in the Master Biweekly Meeting register and
shared with DNV for review/comments/ Action as required – See below template for meet-
ing.
 Items which can not be resolved in MOM and require detail review/Statutory approval will be
issued by TQF to DNV.
 Aker/KBR to send the items to be discussed with DNV via email to DSME key person with CC.
to DSME regulatory before cut off date (until Sunday of that meeting week). DSME Discipline
K/P will include the items in Biweekly meeting agenda. Meeting invitation can be extended
to required discipline K/P ☜ Template for Bi-weekly DNV meeting
Template-DNV
Meeting
PMA : TQF : Technical Query Form
< 19 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Monthly meeting among DNV/DSME/Survey
 Propose to start Monthly meeting 8 months before the Steel Cutting (Tentatively-December,
2022) via TEAMS. Link will be shared by DSME to the relevant all parties
 This is to review the Documentation completion/Doc Req. status/Comment status/CMC sta-
tus/Any critical items identified by DNV
 Critical items such as Structural & Inspection category plan as per DNV-CG-0169 (Quality survey
plan for offshore class new building surveys)/ Fatigue report assessments / Hull approval criti-
cal drawing status/ Hole peneteration plan/ Critical equipment CMC status etc can be typical
topics to discuss in this meeting
 Monthly reports format and contents from DNV to be set up and agreed.

CMC : Certification of Material and Components

< 20 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Regulatory Execution Set up
Regulatory Compliance
 Each responsible Party shall execute
the work as a part of its own scope to
complete the regulatory scope.
 It includes the Equipment regulatory DSME Aker KBR

compliance purchased by each parties.

 Coordination required for all external Classification Classification Classification
Compliance Compliance Compliance
interfaces on regulatory compliance
SCE PS Validation SCE PS Validation SCE PS Validation
Support Support Support

Aus. Flag + Statu- Aus. Flag + Statu- Aus. Flag + Statu-

tory tory tory

EEHA EEHA EEHA

NOPSEMA NOPSEMA NOPSEMA

< 21 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Classification Responsibility Matrix
Company Contractor(DSME)
Activity Aker(Eng’g) KBR(Eng’g) Vendor DNV
(Company) (Eng/Const./Comm.)

Develop Socpe of Work for DNV C P S S P

Contract with DNV P P

KOM with DNV S P S S P

Execute Work as per Classification requirements – Design ap-

proval (Dwg submission, Comments response, TQ, meetings, C P P P P C/A
clarification, etc)

Execute Vendor Compliance with DNV requirements (Type ap-

C C C C P C/A
proval/Design review/Survey) as per PO

Compliance with AMSA/Statutory requirements S P C/S/A

Inspections/Survey/Commissioning activities associated with

C P S S P/A
Class., Punch Close out
Deliverables_Interim Class. Certificate (at FCS sailaway from
S P
yard)
Deliverables_Final Class Certificate at Site (After final completion
P S P
of DNV Inspection at site)

Note ;
P : Primary Responsibility, S : Support, C : Review and Comment, A : Approval of Final Deliverables

< 22 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Lines of Communication – Only Classification
Company AMSA/FLAG

DNV Approval center

AKER/KBR DSME
(OSLO)

DNV Site office

DSME Subcontractor DNV Vendor CMC
DNV Busan office

Documentation flow
Vendors
Main communication line
Auto transmittal from DNV Veracity

*AMSA : Australian Maritime Safety Authority

< 23 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Classification Process
Interface among DSME/AKER/KBR
DSME DNV  Class will create ID/PWD for access into Class Por-
AKER/KBR
(Hull, LQ) tal system for DSME.
 Check for ID creation of Aker/KBR regulatory in-
MDR Set-up for sub- Integrated Regulatory MDR Submission to charge persons
mission to DNV MDR Set-up Class  Dedicated Training/ procedures etc. need be set
up with Class.
Document issue to DSME Submit to DSME/KBR/AKER  MDR submitted to Class to define specific re-
DSME via Dolphin Class Document quirements for engineering/fabrication scope.
 Aker/KBR will submit Drawings/ Calculations/
Re-submission Required Re-submission Required Documents to Class via DSME for approval
Review
 All comments reply through Class Portal system
will be made by DSME after receiving feedback
from Aker/KBR.
Sent By DSME (PCF comment)  TQ submission tor Class for Query/ Clarifications
Auto transmittal from DNV Review comment
to be submitted by DSME
 Auto notification to all Party via Class Portal
(DSME/AKER/KBR/COMPANY)
Comment Reply from PCF Reply Comment Reply DSME register in
Doc. DSME Veracity portal  Sharing of Progress and Outstanding items
Aker/ KBR
 Bi-weekly/Monthly meetings/progress reports
Comment Still Open DNV Comment  Maintain Classification Submittal/Comment regis-
Prepare 2nd Response closed ter by respective parties.
 Maintain Vendor regulatory compliance/ Statu-
All Technical/ Surveyor Update Classification tory Certification
DNV Certification Comments closed Comment register

*PCF : Plan Comments Form, *MDR : Master Document Register, *ID/PWD : Identification / Password
< 24 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Regulatory MDR Set Up
Regulatory MDR Set up with Integrated MDR submission to
AKER/KBR/DSME Plan Dates by respective Class for Markups as per Doc.
stakeholders Req

Document submission to Clas- MDR Markups shared with DNV (OSLO) provide markups
sification as per Markups Aker/KBR on Integrated MDR

MDR re-submitted to DNV for

MDR Revised with Added/
markups (Incl. previous
Modified/Deleted Documents
markups provided by DNV)

Note :
 MDR markups will be requested to DNV on a bimonthly basis
 DNV to provide markups based on Doc. Req. Requirements
 AKER/ KBR to provide MDR to DSME.

< 25 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Document control flow chart(External)
DNV Aker
Notification (Email w/transmittal
Review and as Advanced copy
Comment
KBR

ns (Em l N d
tra on orta ploa
tta l w -
Review turn-around

m i ai o
No

/
ca y p ol U
10 Working days ti
w/ ficati

tifi racit ntr

l
tra on

o
ns
Ve c. C
mi (Em
Do tta ail

ti
l

Aker Upload
Pro Arc To Dolphin AKER
Engineer start Doc. Sent Company Notification
Zip DNV/Com- Notification (E-
mail w/transmit.
Consolidation
review after to CPY with Review and (Email w/ pany and revision
by DSME/CPY)
Doc. Control transmittal comment transmit. Comment for
Upload quality check Doc. Or DWg
KBR To Dolphin

Review turn-around DSME Make Zip file KBR

10 Working days  DNV Comment
Consolidation
Normal Document Workflow  CPY Comment
 DSME comments
and revision
DNV Document Workflow
(For Review/For Information)
Note :
 It is undertood that document submission to DNV to start from Rev. 0 onwards after receiving Code 1 on Rev.A/B/C submissions made to
Company (Aker/KBR/DSME).
 To be checked if it is feasible to submit documents from Rev. 0 ( Issued For Construction ) onwards to DNV depending on Engineering sched-
ule.

< 26 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Typical CPY Doc. Workflow–Eng. Doc. & dwg(Aker/ KBR/DSME)
Repeat with Rev. Counting

Rev. A Code 3
Rev. : B Code 3
Rev. : C
Code 3
Issued for Review Issued for Review Issued for Review

1st issue to DNV Code 1, 2, 4

Code 1, 2, 4

Repeat with Rev. Counting

0A, 0B, 0C / 1A, 1B, 1C…etc.,
Rev. : 0 Rev. : 0A
Code 1, 2, 4 Code 3 Code 3
Issued for Construc- Issued for Review
tion/ Issued for Use
1. IFI has numeric revision such as 0, 1, 2
2. IFR has alpha revision such as A, B, C
Final issue to DNV Code 1, 2, 4
3. IFR with code 1,2 and 4 can be resubmitted Code 1, 4
at revision 0 as an Approved Status(IFC/IFQ/
Code 2 Rev. : 1
IFP/IFU). Code 3
4. If submitted IFC/IFQ/IFP/IFU returned with Issued for Construc-
Code 2 and 3, this should be resubmitted. tion/ Issued for Use
5. If Approved status at numeric revision re-
quired to be reviewed, revision shall be Nu- Code 1, 4
meric alpha such as 0A, 0B, 1A, 1B and IFR
As Built not As Built not
6. IFU shall be an approved status for docu- CLOSED CLOSED
required required
ments (AS IT IS) (AS IT IS)
7. IFC shall be an approved status for drawings
8. Definition of Code :
 Code 1 : Approved  Code 3 : Rejected As Built As Built
required Rev : 1 required Rev : 2
 Code 2 : Approved with  Code 4 : Not Reviewed
As-Built As-Built
Comment
Note:
 Rev.0 IFC s are considered suitable for Submission to DNV
< 27 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Document Submission Process (External)- Aker/KBR
DSME send the con-
DSME Doc. Control
DSME Dolphin sys- firmed DNV trans-
Aker/ KBR System Upload in DNV Verac-
tem mittal response to
ity Portal
Aker/KBR

Resubmit Auto Transmittal

to DNV

Update drawings as Re-submission Req. DNV Re-

per comments Approved with Comments view

Doc. Reviewed/
Approved
Regulatory MDR regis- DSME –Transmittal
ter update and shared to Aker/KBR for
in Aker Share point/ Drawing approval
KBR Share point status

Note :
 It is undertood that document submission to DNV to start from Rev. 0 onwards after receiving Code 1 on Rev.A/B/C submissions made to
Company.
 To be checked if it is feasible to submit from Rev. 0 ( Issued for construction ) onwards to DNV depending on Engineering schedule.

< 28 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Document Submission Process (Internal) - DSME
Doc. Control send
Discipline Lead re- DSME Doc. Control
the confirmed DNV
quest Doc. Control Upload in DNV Verac-
transmittal response
DNV Submission ity Portal
to Discipline lead

Resubmit
to DNV

Update drawings as Re-submission Req. DNV Re-

per comments Approved with Comments view

Doc. Reviewed/
Approved
Doc. Control share DNV
Regulatory MDR reg- Transmittal with Disci-
ister update pline lead for Drawing
approval status

Note :
 DNV Contract may only cover one (1) review cycle only, thus it is recommended that documents are submitted to DNV from Rev. 0 onwards
after receiving Code 1 on Rev.A/B/C submissions made to Company.
 To be checked if it is feasible to submit from Rev. 0 onwards to DNV depending on Engineering schedule.

< 29 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Vendor Regulatory Compliance
Vendor Contact with Class
Class CMC define Reg.
Equip. List submission to Inclusion of T&C in Vendor CMC to clarify require-
Req’t for each Vendor (Pre-
Class. POS ment. Vendor Contract
liminary)
with Class.

Vendor Start submitting De-
sign Documents to Class.
Vendor provide Regulatory
progress report to Contrac-
tor
Class set up ID/PWD for
each vendor (after Con-
tract signed btwn
Vendor/Class.
Vendor Provide Contact de-
tails, Address and Class PO
No. to Contractor to popu-
late Vendor Compliance Reg-
ister
Vendor Sign Class Informa-
tion Disclosure form-submit
to Class and Contractor.

Class Issue Design Close

Class Comment on Vendor
Class provide Oversight to Design Review Comments out letter to Vendor.
documents. Vendor Re-
Contractor Closed by Class Vendor to provide letter to
sponse to Class Comments
Contractor

Vendor submit to Contrac-
Update tracker of Vendor
tor survey reports / Certifi-
regulatory compliance.
cations
Class issue Survey Class attend Vendor FAT to
report/Unit Certification satisfy Vendor survey re-
reports to Vendor quirements

DNV DSME Vendor

< 30 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Comment response Process (External)- Aker/KBR
DNV Comment sent via AKER/KBR submit re-
DNV Comment received on Comment reply to DNV in
Dolphin transmittal to sponse to DSME (within 7
Aker/KBR submittal veracity portal by DSME.
Aker/KBR in PCF form days)

Update drawings as re-

quired. Partial markup can
be submitted with com-
ment response

Open Comments DSME send the confirmed

Aker/KBR to prepare 2nd DNV Re-
DNV transmittal response
Comment reply view
to Aker/KBR

Closed Comment

Aker /KBR will also receive auto transmittal from DNV. DSME –Confirmation email
To be checked with DNV to Aker/KBR comment is
 When DNV comment is made on document closed.
 When comment response is made on veracity
 When document is submitted to DNV

Regulatory comment regis-

ter update and shared in
Aker Share point

< 31 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Comment response Process (Internal)
DNV Comment with
Comment reply to DNV in
DNV Comment received on transmittal link sent to Re- Disp. Incharge prepare
veracity portal by DSME
DSME submittal sponsible engineer by comment response
Regulatory
Doc.Control

Update drawings as re-

quired. Partial markup can
be submitted with com-
ment response as attach-
ment

Open Comments DNV transmittal confirma-

Resp.Engineer to prepare DNV Re-
tion email to Resp.Engi-
2nd Comment reply view
neer by DSME regulatory

Closed Comment

Doc. Control /Reg.Engineer

Confirmation email to Re-
sp.engineer for closed
comments.

Regulatory comment regis-

ter update and shared in
Aker Share point

< 32 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Comment Management Process
 Regulatory Comment register will be set up and shared on weekly basis. Comment
Status Monitoring through this dedicated Master Comment file for comment track-
ing
 Regulatory Comment file updated by regulatory Incharge
 Comment receipt using DNV Veracity portal
 Doc. Control Transfer comment to Incharge person by Email
 Comment Response made by Incharge person
 Reply to DNV Comment in Veracity portal by Doc.Control/Reg.Coordinator
 Comment Response Notification sent to Incharge person
 Bi-weekly status meeting to track the Comment Close out progress

< 33 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Comment Exchange between DSME/Aker/KBR Format
 DSME will return the DNV comments in the following format to Aker/KBR along with DNV ap-
proved Copy of document
 Aker/KBR to return the comment reply within 7 days for official response to DNV with attach-
ment as required to close the DNV comments. If more time is required, forecast dates to be in-
formed to DSME. PCF form to be shared with DSME regulatory/ DSME Discipline lead/ Doc. con-
trol

PCF Form

< 34 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV TQ Process (Internal)
Doc. Control send email to
Discipline lead send Draft DSME Doc. Control Upload
TQ. Number request to DNV PM informing about
TQ to Regulatory + Doc. in DNV Veracity Portal (
Doc. Control TQ issue with CC to Disci-
Control Native file + Attachments)
pline persons

If not accepted, issue Rev.1

Distribute to Incharge
Doc. Control download TQ
Discipline (Doc. Control DNV response (TQ Issue Update TQ register by Doc.
response from
save response in DNV TQ date + 14 days) Control
veracity portal
Folder/Upload in Dolphin

Upload final Approved TQ

Discipline Doc. Control update TQ
in Dolphin and save in
check DNV status and response in TQ
Shared folder by Doc. Con-
response register
trol

 Note; To be finalised with DNV if TQ submission process will be through Veracity or only email
 TQ Numbering procedure
 Sample TQ form with attachments
- TQ DSME : TQ-6065-DSM-RGL-QRY-00xx
- TQ Aker : TQ-6065-AKR-RGL-QRY-00xx
- TQ KBR : TQ-6065-KBR-RGL-QRY-00xx
 Attachment Numbering
: TQ-00xx-001/002/003 with description
< 35 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV TQ Process – Aker / KBR
 For Aker/ KBR , DNV Draft TQ can be sent to DSME Regulatory coordinator/ Interface manager/
Doc. Control.
 DSME will assign TQ number and issue to DNV by email.
 DSME will put regulatory person from Aker/KBR in CC , whenever response is made to inform to
respective parties accordingly.

AKER/KBR Draft TQ to
Assign TQ no. and issue to Issue to DNV with CC to DNV Response sent back
DSME doc. Control/ Regu-
DNV Aker/KBR incharge to Aker/ KBR
latory ( By email)

< 36 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 TQ Format for DNV Query
 Aker /KBR can also use this format to raise Technical query to DNV.
 TQ Number will be assigned by Doc.control and submitted to DNV through veracity portal.
 TQ response (+14 days) after submission will also be sent to respective parties by Doc.control.
 TQ revisions can be raised in Case the Ist response from DNV is not clear

DNV TQF

< 37 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Flag Exemption Process
Drawing approval by DNV
Upload in DNV veracity
Comments as per Statu-
AKER/KBR System DSME Dolphin Portal (DSME)
tory and classification re-
(Doc. Control)
quirements

TQ for any exemption re-

If comment cannot be
quest to Company with DSME send PCF with DNV
complied or exemption is DNV Letter
DNV comments/ Regula- transmittal to KBR/Aker
needed
tory issue

CPY DSME forward Company DNV to request exemption Flag Au-

CPY approval from AMSA
Approval approved TQ to DNV thority

DSME Share with Aker/ DNV receive Flag /AMSA

KBR as required reply

< 38 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Veracity Portal- Progress status
 Document/Comment/ Vendor Comment status can be referred from Veracity portal
 CMC Comment status to have some vendor details to identify issue if any
 Doc. Req. requirements and MDR document mapping to be finaslised first so that accurate sta-
tus can be seen in Veracity portal.

< 39 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 Document mapping (To be discussed with DNV)
 DSME Request DNV to provide markups on Integrated MDR ( DSME/AKER/KBR).
 Revised MDR will also be submitted on Bimonthly basis higlighting the change from previous
MDR for DNV markups
 Request DNV to map the documents in DNV veracity portal
 It is understood that Mapping to be finalised by DNV before official document submission are
made in DNV veracity portal .
. R eq
Integrated MDR update(DSME D oc
p le
+AKER /KBR) m
Sa
↓
DNV map documents in veracity as
per Doc.Req.

< 40 / 58 >
2. Regulatory Execution Plan
 DNV Information Disclosure form (PO+ 10 Days)
The below disclosure form will be attached with PO and sent to all selected vendor for signature
and need to be delivered by vendors to DSME within 10 days after PO.
☜ DNV Disclosure Release Form
Disclose Form

 Document Administration

Receipt Disclosure form

from Vendor (DSME)
↓
Submit to DNV (DSME)
↓
Access to Vendor Status
(DSME)
↓
Update Disclosure form
register (Internal)
( Received/ Not received)

Sample DNV Information Disclosure Release Form

< 41 / 58 >
3. Area of Concern (1/2)
No. Subject Description Discipline Remark
1 Doc. req. mapping DNV to provide Doc. Req. requirements and also provide EM
Markup on MDR. Revised MDR will be submitted to DNV on a
bimonthly basis for review and markup.

2 AMSA / Statutory DNV to provide some guidelines and applicable MARINE order EM
requirements and mandatory statutory requirements for this facility

3 Document review Which engineering document will be used by Surveyor during EM

cycle and Surveyor class verification (Approved drawing in veracity or Construc-
verification tion drawings) ?
During Course of Project, there are revisions on document and
we want to know criteria acceptable to DNV ( Like for E.g Ma-
jor Changes) for deciding which document need to be resub-
mitted to DNV for approval.

4 DNV Rule 2018 vs If there are any complusory requirements in DNV rules after EM
2021 Gap Dec.2018 which needs to be mandatorily followed by DSME.

5 Technical Query re- DNV to respond all technical queries within 10 working days PM
sponse time after issue

< 42 / 58 >
3. Area of Concern (2/2)
No. Subject Description Discipline Remark
6 Penetration Inter- How DNV review will take place for all hole penetration on EM
faces and Class re- Hull /Topsides.
view

7 CMC – Certification DNV to provide initial markup on Equipment list – required EM

of Material and DNV certifications (as a PC, PD, PTR, TAC and None). This will
Components be just a intial list and all vendors identified will separately Eq. MEL List_DNV
contact DNV local offices to decide their Classification Compli- Cert.
ance scope.
8 Applicable DNV DNV to provide list of all DNV rules/standards applicable for EM
Rules and Standards this facility

9 Veracity Portal  Access account to be provided for designated person EM

 Auto Transmittals from Veracity (Doc. upload/Comment re-
sponse etc)
10 Validation Scope vs DNV to confirm the Classification scope of responsibility for EM
Classification Scope Validation Work Process – Refer to appendix 7

End of Presentation
*PC : Product Certificate, *PD : Product Declaration, *PTR : Product Test Report *TAC : Type Approval Certificate
< 43 / 58 >
Validations Scope Slide
(Slide 45 ~ 58)
Out of DNV Presentation

< 44 / 58 >
Appendix 1. NOPSEMA Safety Case Approach
 A facility cannot be constructed, installed, operated, modified or decommissioned without a
safety case in force for that stage in the life of the facility.

 The operator of a facility must

submit the safety case to
NOPSEMA with either a
NOPSEMA pro-forma cover
sheet or a covering letter stating
that it is being submitted for as-
sessment. Since it is the opera-
tor that must submit the safety
case, registration of the opera-
tor must be completed (and a
scope of validation for a pro-
posed facility agreed) prior to
safety case submission.

NOPSEMA Safety Case Approach

*NOPSEMA : National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority

< 45 / 58 >
Appendix 2 - NOPSEMA Validation

< 46 / 58 >
Appendix 3. Independent Validation Body Scope Compliance (Lloyd)
Company Performance
Standards

Validation compli- Document Register

ance plan (Lloyd + Safety studies Validation Scheme (L-
Chevron) Class certification loyd)

1) Contract specification Execute vali-

2) DNV Classification/Statutory dation
3) AMSA Marine Order actvity in ac-
Procurement re- 4) Australianstandards
Design requirements
quirement
cordance
5) International standards with scheme
6) Vendor Classification Compliance

Construction/ Com- Chevron Self verifica-

missioning tion Validate the safety case

Support by DSME/ Submission of safety

case to NOPSEMA
AKER/KBR (Chevron)

< 47 / 58 >
Appendix 4. Validation Scope
 Lloyd will carry out the scope of validation based on classification scope and appropriate codes and
standards as listed in Appendix 1 of SCE PS

*SCE : Safety Critical Elements *PS : Performance Standard

< 48 / 58 >
Appendix 5. Validation / Verification Regulations

< 49 / 58 >
Appendix 6. Lloyd Scope of Work (1/3)
 Lloyd will perform the validation scope based on Integrity critical elements compliance with list of
applicable codes and standards

< 50 / 58 >
Appendix 6. Lloyd Scope of Work (2/3)

< 51 / 58 >
Appendix 6. Lloyd Scope of Work (3/3)

< 52 / 58 >
Appendix 7. Lloyd Scope of Validation Work Process
 Scope of Validation is under Chevron Scope
 DSME/AKER/KBR will support the validation scope as per below responsibility matrix
Company Contractor (DSME) Aker KBR Validator Class
Activity Vendor
(Chevron) (Eng'g/Const./Com.) (Eng'g) (Eng'g) (Lloyd) (DNV)
Appoint Independent Validator (Lloyd) P
Develop Project Validation scheme and interface procedures for verifing
the performance standards throughout all project phases until operational P
handover
Develop high level (SMART) performance standards for SCE, identifying
requirements arising from their role in major accidents prevention / P
mitigation
Develop and maintain a schedule of safety related systems based upon the
SCE P C
Develop and maintain Performance standards for each SCE P C
Compile set of performance standards (Deliverable) P S
Review of Performance standards and verification with fBOD/Specs etc
and Inrorporation in POS and Design doc. P P P P P
Develop Validation scope of work P S
Interface between Validation/Self verification/Class. Scope P S S S S S
Approval of Scope of validation from NOPSEMSA P S
Undertake Validation activities for Performance standards A S S S S P P
Maintain Validation records and prepare validation summary reports A P P
Audit Validation process P S S S S
Validation Close out report A P
Note ;
P : Primary Responsibility, S : Support, C : Review and Comment, A : Approval of Final Deliverables
 Validation activity by DNV is presently not included in DNV Scope of work
< 53 / 58 >
Appendix 8. Australian Legislation Codes and Standards

< 54 / 58 >
Appendix 9. Integrity Critical Elements

< 55 / 58 >
Appendix 10. Drawing/Doc. Validation Review Process – Lloyd (TBD)

AKER/KBR/ DSME Draw- No Comment

Drawing submission to
ings in Company document Lloyd
Lloyd via Chevron
Portal

Comment

DSME/AKER/KBR Update
DSME/AKER/KBR prepare
drawings and issue to Company
comment response
Company

Company review and re- No Comment Close the validation activ-

Lloyd
sponse to Lloyd ity

Comment

Note :
 This process need to be further discussed with Company after SOW is finalised with Lloyd

< 56 / 58 >
Appendix 11. Survey Inspection (TBD)
 Vendor Survey Inspection DNV /CPY Self-Verification/Validation

DNV Class DNV Surveyor Survey Report

Vendor Yard QM
Validation +
CPY Self verifi-
Self verifi- Inspection
cation + Valida- CPY Inspector
cation Report
tion (TBD) compliance

 Yard Survey Inspection DNV Class/CPY Self-Verification/Validation

Plan Review Survey/Inspection

DNV Class DNV Surveyor Survey Report

DSME Yard QM
Validation +
CPY Self verifi-
Self verifi- Inspection
cation + Valida- CPY Inspector
cation Report
tion (TBD) compliance

Note :
 Company Self Verification is mostly related to Quality Practices and procedures

< 57 / 58 >
Appendix 12. Validation/Self Verification Scope – Area of Concern

 Applicable rules and standard version used for Lloyd validation

 Validation/Self verification Scheme Interface with DSME/AKER/KBR
 Validation scheme vs Classification scope
 NOPSEMA comments at very late stage
 Interface between various stakeholders during validation execution

< 58 / 58 >