Tandem Loading Guidelines v1 21
Tandem Loading Guidelines v1 21
Tandem Loading Guidelines v1 21
Volume 1
March 2011
Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this
publication, neither Oil & Gas UK, nor any of its members will assume liability for any use made
of this publication or the model agreement to which it relates.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without prior written permission of the publishers.
Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of Her Majestys
Stationery Office.
Copyright 2011 The United Kingdom Offshore Oil and Gas Industry Association Limited trading
as Oil & Gas UK
Contents
1. Introduction
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
Preamble
Definitions
Abbreviations
Legislation
Concept and Design Phase
Operating Phase
4. Safe Operations
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
Introduction
FPSO/FSU Competence
Matrices
DP Tanker Training and Experience Matrices 1 & 2
Masters Experience Flowchart
DP Training & Competence Assurance
6. Management System
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Objective
Management Audits
Vessel Acceptance and Auditing
Joint Operations Manual
7. Incident Reporting
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
Objective
Background
Incident Reporting via Oil & Gas UK
IMCA Station Keeping Incident Reporting
Forms
8. References
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
5
5
5
7
11
11
13
13
15
15
15
16
20
20
21
21
23
23
23
25
25
29
29
31
31
31
32
32
39
39
39
39
40
40
41
ii
43
55
75
Appendix D: Oil & Gas UK Model FPSO/FSU & Tanker Acceptance System
89
95
99
113
121
1.
Introduction
1.1
1.2
Authority
1.3
Background
The first edition of these Guidelines was published by the then United Kingdom
Offshore Operators Association, (UKOOA) in March 2002.
The upgrade of these Guidelines is to keep pace with progress in the relevant
technologies, and to assimilate lessons learned and experience gathered during
the last decade.
The update involved reviewing current UK practices, the implications of UK
legislation, existing industry guidance and international initiatives. It was
undertaken with the active participation of operators, Duty Holders, the HSE,
tanker operators and marine consultants. Oil & Gas UK has noted from an
investigation of incidents during the last decade that the incident rate does not
appear to depend on the technical sophistication of the shuttle tanker, be it:
DP Class 2,
DP Class 1,
non-DP (but specially modified for bow loading),
DP Classed tankers operating in taut hawser (non-DP) mode.
Introduction
1
1.4
Objective
These Guidelines are intended to help reduce the incident rate and to reduce the
inherent risk of a major accident to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) in
accordance with UK goal setting legislation.
1.5
These guidelines consider that operators and Duty Holders should concentrate
on the following principal factors to reduce the risks associated with tandem
offtake operations:
Undertaking an effective conceptual risk assessment of offtake
alternatives as part of the concept selection process for all future UK field
developments to ensure offtake risks are ALARP.
Ensuring that the installed hardware and software, as far as reasonably
practicable, reduces the ability of a single point failure to cause a
significant loss of station-keeping, or a significant loss of containment,
whilst the tanker is in close proximity.
Ensuring that failure mode effects on the tanker and the FPSO/FSU are
tested and understood by the crews, as well as being theoretically
analysed. This should apply to modifications as well as the original
system.
Providing appropriate guidance on the equipment failure, operational,
environmental and station keeping limits, beyond which the stationkeeping mode should be changed or connection abandoned.
Providing sufficient key personnel of appropriate competence on both the
FPSO/FSU and the offtake tanker.
Ensuring the management culture is such that the FPSO/FSUs OIM and
marine operators plus the tanker Master and senior DPOs are all
confident that any decision to disconnect on the grounds of safety or
environmental risk is fully supported by onshore management.
Encouraging the effective sharing of information on the causes of
incidents, or potential incidents, between operators and tanker managers
to speed up learning and reduce the risk of repeat events.
These guidelines deal mainly with the above areas, but only in so far as they
affect the risks when the two vessels are operating in close proximity to each
other during offtake. Where possible Oil & Gas UK have tried to adopt or
reinforce appropriate International or Industry guidance rather than develop a
new conflicting set of standards.
1.6
Standards
Generic standards are given in these guidelines for critical elements of the
offtake activity. These are elements on the FPSO/FSU and offtake tanker with a
potential impact on safety or pollution during preparatory or connected offtake
activities. Some of these elements may also be safety critical elements (SCE),
as defined in the Safety Case and supporting legislation, but only if they form
part of the FPSO/FSU fixed installation, and are found to be SCEs by a field
specific evaluation process. The standards largely adopt existing IMO, IMCA
and OCIMF guidelines.
Under UK goal setting legislation the generic guidance and standards described
in this document can be varied or replaced with standards more appropriate to a
Introduction
2
specific field by any Operator or Duty Holder provided they undertake field
specific risk assessments to justify ALARP within their safety case. These
Guidelines are intended to focus effort on critical areas and identify typical norms
to help manage UK tandem offtake operations in an acceptable manner. They
are not intended as a substitute for performing field specific risk assessments,
setting field specific standards, or managing on board tanker operations in a safe
manner.
The overall Oil & Gas UK scheme to manage tandem offtake risks is summarised
in Figure 1.1.
Introduction
3
Figure 1.1: Oil & Gas UK Tandem Offtake Risk Reduction Strategy
Introduction
4
2.
Preamble
The following abbreviations and terminology are commonly used in the offshore
industry and, in particular, the tanker loading and dynamic positioning fields. The
objective of this section is to clarify the meaning of these terms as they are used
in this document.
2.2
Definitions
Annual DP Trials
The Annual Trials is a set of system failure tests and operational tests of the DP
and ancillary systems in accordance with IMCA M139. These tests should be
carried out annually and witnessed by an independent 3rd party.
The
Classification Society is not normally defined as a 3rd party since they will have
their own requirements for maintenance of DP Class.
ASD 1
Automatic Shut Down Class 1. Automatic shut down of the FPSO/FSU export
pumps, and in some cases the export valve, followed by closing of the tanker
coupler valve and the first loading line valve, on loss of the Green Line". This
may be expanded to be related to a position loss which reaches the yellow sector
in the DP Operating Limits diagram. (See ESD 1)
ASD 2
Same as ASD 1 but will also include auto disconnection of the hose and hawser.
(See ESD 2). Should an ASD system be fitted, vessels should make suitable
provision for warning to be given locally, and crews to be trained to react
appropriately.
BLS FMEA
Bow Loading System Failure Mode & Effect Analysis. The FMEA covers all
loading related systems and should be focused on the consequences of a single
point failure in this system.
DP System
All relevant shipboard equipment used for automatic positioning of the vessel
including all propulsion units and their controls, both manual and automatic,
power generation equipment, computer systems and all vessel heading, motion,
wind and position reference systems.
DP Class 1
Describes a DP vessel where a single failure may cause loss of position, as per
IMO MSC 645 guideline definition.
DP Class 1 Enhanced
Describes a DP 1 Class vessel with several improvements which minimise the
risk from certain failures e.g. full pitch on a single main propeller. DP 1
Enhanced should have no more probability of Drive Off than DP Class 2, and
uses the ALARP principle with respect to the practicability of conversion to
address the more improbable causes of Drift Off. A Class 1 vessel which
Closed
Hose
In Position
Bow Coupler
Closed
Cargo system
Ready
Normal
Hawser Tension
Normal
Normal
Open
Coupler valve
Open
Tandem Operation
This describes the normal method of loading from a ship-shaped FPSO or FSU,
where the tanker keeps station astern of the FPSO/FSU on approximately the
same heading relative to the weather. Either one or both vessels will have some
means of propulsion, certainly the offtake tanker but potentially the FPSO/FSU
too. There are similar types of offtake operation that are undertaken, such as
from a spread moored ship shape or round FPSO/FSU, and while these have
similar elements to tandem operation, the differences should also be understood.
Some guidance is given in Appendix H.
2.3
Abbreviations
ALARP
AOGBO
ATC
BLS
CAPEX
Capital Expenditure
CCR
CCTV
CoA
Contract of Affreightment
COW
CPP
DARPS
DCR
DGPS
DISPORT
Discharge Port
DP
Dynamic Positioning
DP CAP
DPO
DSV
ERS
ERRV
ESD
FMEA
FPSO/FSU
FSOG
HiPAP
HPR
HSE
Hs
Hmax
HSWA
ICP/B
IG
Inert Gas
IMCA
IMO
JOM
LV
Low Voltage
MAR
MARPOL
MBC
MBL
MODU
MSC
MSS
NDBS
NMD
NVQ
OCIMF
OIM
OLS
OPEX
OPerating EXpenditure
OPITO
PFEER
PLC
PMS
PPE
PSD
Process ShutDown
QCDC
ROV
SAL
SCE
SCR
SIMOPS
SIMultaneous OPerationS
SIRE
SMS
SPM
ST
Shuttle Tanker
STCW 95
STL
SVQ
TAV
TM
Transverse Mercator
UHF
UPS
VHF
VOC
Intentionally Blank
3.
Legislation
and risk management. The historical frequency of minor collisions and potential
incidents, published by IMCA, HSE and others, suggests that, while all
operations have been reviewed, assessed and accepted as ALARP further
efforts are required to ensure that the procedures on which these assessments
are based are being carried out in practice. This will require the co-operation of
all involved parties including Duty Holders and tanker managers. The following
hierarchy of risk reducing techniques can be applied throughout the entire field
life of any offshore project.
3.2
1)
2)
3.3
Operating Phase
Risk Reduction Technique
3)
4)
5)
Intentionally Blank
4.
Safe Operations
4.1
4.2
As described in the Introduction, there are some elements of the offtake activity
which could rightly be described as Safety Critical Elements as the term is used
in the SCR and supporting regulations such as PFEER. The following list is
intended as a guide to Duty Holders as to what elements may be considered in
this regard. This list is not exhaustive, neither is it definitive in terms of any
particular installation.
General
Weather Limitations
Communications
Tanker Approach
SIMOPS
Approach Speed
Position Reference Systems
Power Generation
Propulsion / Thrusters
Tanker Connection
Tanker Offloading
Station Keeping
Power Consumption / Limits
Hose
Offloading ESD Telemetry
Safe Operations
15
4.3
Safe Operations
This section describes some of the most important points gained from a review of
various Operators SCEs and checklists. It is not exhaustive but provides
information on the practical aspects of the FPSO/FSU and tanker hardware and
operations.
Weather Limitations
The offtake tanker should normally only approach within 3nm provided the
maximum wind speed, Hs, Hmax, visibility, and FPSO/FSU motions and yaw rate
are within safe limits.
Typical values for DP and taut hawser tankers are described in Appendix A. It
should be noted that these are typical maximums and it should not be construed
that these values are targets which should be achieved on all occasions. Both
the OIM and the tanker Master have authority to cease or suspend operations at
any time on the basis of safety.
Communications
The expected level for close approach should be a minimum of two different
systems providing clear and uninterrupted voice communications e.g. VHF and
UHF. Any loss of communications should be seen as being potentially serious
and operations should not take place where any systems required for this
minimum level are not operating correctly. Further guidance is provided in the
Appendix.
Safe Operations
16
Crew Competence
This is discussed at length in Section 5.
Simultaneous Vessel Operations (SIMOPS)
The FPSO/FSU procedures should contain guidance as to any precautions
necessary where one or more additional vessels are operating in the vicinity of
the installation, but it is appreciated that, due to the multitude of potential
scenarios, this may not be practicable other than for routine operations such as
supply vessels and ERRVs. Other SIMOPS are usually addressed by specific
HIRA taking account of the locations and workscopes of all vessels.
Approach Speed
The speed of approach of the tanker to the FPSO/FSU forms one aspect of the
joint operations and should be specific to each installation. Typical values are as
follows:
3 nautical miles from the FPSO//FSU -
< 5 knots
< 2 knots
At a safe distance, and in any event before reaching 500 metres, the tanker must
be stopped to engage DP approach mode, followed by a suitable settling time for
the DP model.
Speed of approach from 500m to line shooting position should not exceed 0.5
knots.
Position Reference Systems
In order to be in line with all other critical DP operations, this guidance
recommends the use of three independent position reference systems, operating
on different principles. For tandem offtake use, these may include:
Artemis
Relative GPS
Radius/RadaScan or similar radar based system
Hydro acoustic systems (Not normally used for tandem operations but is
necessary for other types of offtake facilities such as SAL)
Laser based systems (where meteorological conditions are suitable)
Absolute DGPS*
* The absolute DGPS is typically only used for the purpose of selecting the reaction box (FSU
Position function Kongsberg only)
Safe Operations
17
Safe Operations
18
Cargo Transfer
The major safeguard against pollution incidents caused by high pressure hose
failure is the Green Line system. It should be ascertained at the start of each
loading that the FPSO/FSU export pump stop is operating correctly and in a
suitable time which is compatible with the tankers inlet valve closure time.
Station Keeping
The shuttle tanker should maintain position within the limits defined by the
operating limits diagram. However, in addition to out of position reports as
required by this diagram, the tanker should inform the FPSO/FSU of any
condition on board which may reduce the station keeping capability. This is
further discussed under Field Specific Operating Guidelines in Section 6. In any
event, the shuttle tanker Master or duty officer has a duty to stop the operation
should he feel that the station keeping is deteriorating. This will also be the case
where the overall power consumption and/or a single thruster power level have
reached their defined limit, in terms of continuous average power usage.
There should also be an instruction on the FPSO/FSU to relate any degradation
on the installation, that can affect the shuttle tanker, with reference to the FSOG.
Checklists
Properly designed and easy to operate check-lists can go a long way towards
ensuring that the tanker and FPSO/FSU systems are correctly checked and
mutually acceptable prior to the connection taking place.
Generally three systems of check-lists should be in place:
1.
2.
3.
Common Check-list
The internal check-lists (1. and 2.) should be designed to ensure that all system
parameters for the offtake are within limits; this will generally mean that these
systems are all in working order and to expectations of performance. There will
be times where this is not the case and it is important that the vessel
understands the criticality of any outages and has suitable plans in place which
clearly define whether operations can proceed or not.
The check-lists should reflect and reference the appropriate system manuals and
procedures, and there should be no items in the check-list which cannot be
verified and further information found elsewhere.
Checklists should be
completed in hard copy or electronic means which can be filed for future auditing
if necessary.
The Common check-list (3.) should be designed to pass relevant information
between the two vessels, and should ensure a phased review of readiness such
that this checklist is completed for each step of the operation, and with clear hold
points such that the operation can be aborted if the checklist parameters cannot
be met.
Examples of suitable checklists are given in Appendix F. These are examples
only and not necessarily suitable for all FPSOs/FSUs and Tankers. However,
the layout of the columns may be considered as a template.
Safe Operations
19
4.4
4.5
DP Classification
MSC Circ 645 states; 1) that the equipment class of a vessel required for a
particular operation should be agreed between the owner of the vessel and the
customer based on a risk analysis of the consequence of a loss of position. 2)
Alternatively, the administration or coastal state may decide the equipment class
for the particular operation. For UK FPSOs, UK FSUs or tankers performing DP
offtakes in UK fields and where there are no more rigorous administration or
coastal state prescriptive definitions of equipment class for UK then:
These guidelines consider that IMO MSC Circ 645 Equipment Class 2
standard should be adopted, as far as reasonably practicable, for
FPSOs/FSUs intended for tandem offtake with active heading control, and
for offtake tankers intended for DP offtake in the UK sector.
These guidelines recognise that there are existing active heading
controlled FPSOs, FSUs and also DP offtake tankers in service, which are
exceptionally difficult to upgrade to fully comply with IMO Equipment Class
2 requirements. Oil & Gas UK consider that the bare minimum Class 1
requirements are insufficient for either FPSO/FSU active heading control
or tankers performing DP offtake. However under the UK goal setting
regime it is possible to risk assess such vessels and upgrade many of the
less difficult, but more critical, systems to reduce collision risks to ALARP
levels. Some such installations and tankers already have equipment levels
nearer to Class 2 standards than Class 1 in many safety critical areas.
These Guidelines recommend that such existing units should demonstrate
their adequacy by:
A) risk assessment,
B) making enhancements where practicable towards Class 2 levels,
Safe Operations
20
4.6
4.7
These Guidelines consider that the standards of FMEA analysis and subsequent
FMEA trials and periodic testing outlined in MSC Circ 645 and further detailed in
IMCA M112 Part 2, M166, and M178, should be applied both to FPSO/FSU
active heading control systems and to tanker DP systems to ensure ongoing
assurance, e.g.
In the absence of a Flag State Verification and Acceptance Document; a
FMEA, including a complete FMEA proving trial, should be conducted by
an independent company. The trial should cover all systems and
components and assess the ability to maintain station after a single
component failure. The minimum Oil & Gas UK acceptance standard for
DP offtake or active heading control is DP Class 1 Enhanced, and there
should be an ability to maintain station for as many single failure modes as
is reasonably practicable. Hence the FMEA proving and other DP trials
should be based on the Class 2 rather than the Class 1 philosophy to
ensure that failure modes are identified.
Conduct annual surveys and trials. The extent and level of survey and
trials should be in accordance with IMCA M139 and may be embedded in
the vessel maintenance programme to the satisfaction of an ICP. The
Safe Operations
21
annual trials should be performed by, and may be documented by, ships
staff but in any event should be witnessed by a competent 3rd Party. The
trials should be performed as a single exercise.
Resurvey against the FMEA, every 5th year, and in any event after either a
DP system failure or modification. This should be timed to coincide with
the Annual DP trials for that year.
Whenever a fault is discovered and repaired or the system modified in
even a minor way, full tests of the effect of the changes should be
performed and logged. The changes and type of tests performed and
results achieved should be recorded. A note of the tests and results
should be made in the onboard FMEA report.
These guidelines consider the FMEA, including proving trials and the above tests
and checks, to be the primary means of providing initial and ongoing assurance
of station keeping hardware integrity.
Safe Operations
22
5.
Introduction
Crew competency in station keeping tasks is a key factor in reducing offtake risks
to ALARP levels. Oil & Gas UK recommend the use of goal setting matrices for
evaluating whether tanker crews have sufficient competence to undertake
offloading operations in UK waters. The first is a training matrix; the second is an
experience matrix. The standards set out in the matrices are in addition to the
existing flag state competency requirements for tanker masters, deck and
engineering officers and crews as required by IMOs STCW 95.
The training elements for DP shuttle tankers concentrate on issues related to
dynamic positioning and offshore loading and are inclusive of training
requirements for relevant auxiliary equipment and systems. The experience
elements are concerned principally with tanker experience, experience at the
specific type of loading facility and DP CAP to hone ship-handling skills. Training
and experience gained, including DP CAP hours, should be logged in the
officers individual DP logbook.
The concepts of goal setting and competence requirements are well established
in the UK offshore sector and should be used for FPSO/FSU marine personnel.
5.2
FPSO/FSU Competence
The OIM must have an understanding of the risks involved in the joint
operation. This can be based on prior knowledge and experience or a
combination of formal training and experience.
2.
3.
4.
5.
5.3
Matrices
Purpose
It is proposed that the Tanker Owner/Manager should complete the blank training
and experience matrices for each tanker crew. The Duty Holder should maintain
competence records for each FPSO/FSU crew. For each tanker and FPSO/FSU
crew the responsible party should ensure that there is the best match of training
and experience within each watch.
The matrices for tanker personnel are configured to cover all known types of
offshore loading facility, so that the tanker managers only have to complete one
pair of forms, rather than a different set of forms for each Duty Holder or field.
Completed matrices should be updated and forwarded to the FPSPO/FSU prior
to every offtake. Matrices should be supplied to the field Duty Holder before a
new tanker is introduced. Additional updates may also be requested for audit,
for spot check purposes, or during the nomination process of approving the
vessel for next offtake. Alternatively, Tanker Managers who have their own
system for tracking and controlling experience may transfer equivalent data from
their system to the Duty Holder for comparison to the Oil & Gas UK standards.
The matrices and minimum acceptable experience levels are described in the
following sections.
5.4
Electrician
1st Engineer
Chief Engineer
Junior DPO2
Junior DPO1
Senior DPO2
Master
Senior DPO1
DP Basic 1 (Induction)
DP Advanced1 (Simulator)
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
<2Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Position Reference
Operating courses
specif y other
Artemis
DGPS
DARPS
HPR
BLOM
RADIUS
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
specif y other
Position Reference
Maintenance courses
DP
Telemetry
Artemis
DGPS
DARPS
HPR
HiPAP
BLOM
1 PERSON ONBOARD
TANKER TRAINED FOR
EACH INSTALLED
SYSTEM
specif y other
Notes
1) Various NI Approved training institutions provide DP basic and Advanced courses. The basic and advanced DP training courses
should include theory and practice of shuttle tanker operations and be carried out on the type of DP control system fitted to the tanker.
2) At the time of w riting Off shore Loading Courses Phases 1, 2 and 3 are only available at the SMS facility in Trondheim.
The form contains training f or systems that may not be applicable on some tankers or off take facilities. Please respond w ith N w here no
training has been undertaken. Oil Companies should disregard inf ormation provided on systems that are not fitted nor required for
of ftake from their particular installations. KEY: -Y=Training Complete, N=No Training, otherw ise f ill in date of last training etc as denoted in
the table headings.
Senior DPO to have minimum certificate of Deck officer Class 2 licence
Master :- Months
since last offtake at
Facility Type
Electrician
1st Engineer
Chief Engineer
Junior DPO2
Junior DPO1
Senior DPO2
Master
Senior DPO1
Ref
flow
chart 1
OLS
SPM
SAL
12
12
12
12
12
Number of offloadings
performed in DP-mode
at, each type of single
point offshore
installations
Notes
1) The form contains experience w hich may not be applicable for some tankers or offtake facilities. Please respond w ith none w here
no experience has been undertaken.
I.e. Any individual may be below the ideal experience provided there are arrangements in place to compensate for this. E.g. His
counterpart is more experienced than the minimum or additional qualif ied DPO on w atch / compensation by master. The Chief Officer
experience in rank could include experience gained as Chief Officer jr position.
KEY: - N = no experience, N/A = not applicable, otherw ise fill in numbers to denote no. of offtakes, month since last of ftake or years
experience as denoted in the table headings.
2) The prime mode of operation being assessed on this sheet is as a DP tanker. How ever there are circumstances at passive
w eather vaning FPSO's w here DP tankers may operate in taut haw ser mode and hence experience in this area is appropriate. If the
of ficers lack experience of taut haw ser operation, the operation requires to be risk assessed and everyone to be comfortable to
carry on in this mode prior to comencement.
5.5
There are specific experience requirements for the tanker Master, which are in
addition to the above training and experience matrices, and competence
requirements for the FPSO/FSU heading control operator. The experience
requirements in Matrices 1 and 2 do not differentiate between offloading
operations carried out in a particular rank, e.g. the required number of offloads
may have been carried out at a lower rank. However, the Masters experience
flow chart does address the issue of the Masters actual experience in command
of shuttle tanker operations.
In order for a Master to be allowed to carry out an unsupervised offload operation
at the facility in question, he must be able to comply with the requirements of the
flowchart as well as the training and experience matrices. The exception is a
newly promoted Master, who must comply with the provisions of Note 2.
The flowchart is self-explanatory. If the serving Master does not comply with the
provisions of the flow chart then the vessel manager should transfer an
appropriately qualified and experienced master to the FPSO/FSU or tanker. The
additional Master will remain on board the tanker in an advisory capacity for the
duration of the offloading operation. The additional Master will not take
command of the vessel. A column is included on Matrix 1 for the Master to
indicate how long since he last performed an offtake from each type of loading
facility.
5.6
DPCAP
DP CAP is a training tool, developed by Navion (now TK) in close cooperation
with Global Maritime and the Ship Manoeuvring Simulation Centre in Trondheim,
which has been in service since 2003. A row is included in Matrix 2 to permit
Duty Holders to monitor that DP CAP is actually being carried out. Oil & Gas UK
members should actively encourage tanker Masters to use lay time for DP CAP
whenever it can be accommodated without jeopardising other infield operations.
Presently (2010) the programme is confined to vessels equipped with the
Kongsberg DP control system.
Other Systems
Other systems may be available both for training and confirming the competence
of personnel. These should be taken into consideration and assessed if new
tools for this enter the market.
NO
YES
Has the master performed 2
or more unsupervised
loading operations as
master from the type of
facility in question?
NO
YES
Has the master performed 3
unsupervised loading
operations from the type of
facility in question and has
it been less than 6 months
since the last loading of this
type?
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
Master can carry out
loading operation
unsupervised
YES
Loading operation must be
supervised by a master that
complies with
recommended standards
and with this flowchart
NOTE:
1.
A Master who requires supervision under the terms of this flowchart will be permitted to perform a loading operation unsupervised at the type of facility in question
following one supervised loading.
2.
A newly promoted Master who has served as chief officer on an offtake tanker for a minimum of 2 years, and carried out a minimum of 2 supervised loading
operations at the type of facility, is exempt from the requirements of this flowchart.
6.
Management System
6.1
Objective
The object of the Field Operator and Duty Holders management systems should
be to ensure that:
All new offtake systems have been selected to reduce inherent risk to
ALARP at the field concept selection stage.
All critical elements on both the FPSO/FSU and all associated offtake
tankers have been adequately designed, installed, assured and verified as
per the standards in these Guidelines including the Appendices.
Key personnel on both the FPSO/FSU and associated offtake tankers
have been trained and have adequate experience in accordance with the
requirements of Section 5.
Duty Holders, offtake tanker managers and key personnel on the
FPSO/FSU and associated offtake tankers all learn from previous
experience by being open about problems experienced and sharing
incident data as described in Section 7.
Key personnel on both the FPSO/FSU and all associated tankers have
clear guidance on the special features, Duty Holder requirements and
operational limits for each field by issuing a Joint Operations Loading
Manual.
There are adequate management controls and audit checks all the way
down the supply chains for both FPSO/FSU and offtake tanker services to
ensure that risk reducing measures are applied effectively on both vessels
participating in any tandem offtake (FPSO/FSU and Tanker).
6.2
Management Audits
Management System
31
Joint Responsibility
The FPSO operator (in co-operation with the Duty Holder if separate) shall
maintain and act on a management audit plan covering the audit of all levels
down the supply chain. This will include both direct audits of main contractors
organisations, review of each main contractors own audit plan for relevant
subcontractors or vessels, and sample observation / participation in the main
contractors audits of their sub contractors and vessels to ensure that the overall
system is consistent and that risk reducing strategies are not diluted as they pass
down the supply chain.
6.3
Preamble
The FPSO/FSU and shuttle tankers should be audited against field specific
performance standards and Oil & Gas UK training and experience requirements.
Any findings should be actively closed out and documented closed. The tanker
audit programme should cover both initial acceptance and ongoing maintenance
in a condition acceptable for offtake. This is the management tool to ensure that
equipment and personnel are initially checked as fit for purpose and continue to
be maintained in that condition.
FPSO/FSU
The general safety condition of the FPSO/FSU to perform production and / or
storage should be covered by the Duty Holders existing SMS and ICP inspection
under UK regulations. However, offtake systems and tandem offtake station
keeping aids do not fall readily within the experience of many of the specialist
companies or personnel who routinely deal with these issues on production
platforms, and suitable expertise must be sourced for these systems.
Offtake Tanker
The general safety condition of a tanker to perform crude oil transport and
discharge at inshore terminals is covered by Duty Holder and Operator vetting
systems, generally using the OCIMF SIRE system. The SIRE system, however,
does not cover bow loading systems or close proximity station keeping
arrangements. The Duty Holder should ensure that suitable expertise for these
aspects is sourced, and suitable audits are carried out.
6.4
The field specific joint operations manual is the main procedure controlling
discharge operations on any field. It should contain the following information:
Summary field position and field layout and FPSO/FSU information
including plans of the stern offtake arrangements, and appropriate
photographs.
Contact numbers, call signs and communications channels for both
Operational and Emergency use.
Description of the offloading equipment on board the FPSO/FSU.
Description of standard and occasional joint operations including cargo
transfer rates, line flushing etc.
Data sheets on all tankers nominated for regular offtake at that field.
Management System
32
Management System
33
Management System
34
Routine checks
Record keeping
Completion of discharge
Hose flushing
Disconnection & Departure
Hose and hawser disconnection and transfer
Departure
Cargo documentation
Emergency Response
Incident Response Procedures
Emergency Notification Flowchart
Offtake Tanker Specifications
FPSO Checklists
Joint Operations Procedure Checklist
Documentation Templates (timesheets, sailing advice, cargo reports etc)
Field Specific Operating Guidelines (FSOG)
These Oil & Gas UK guidelines support the concept of a FSOG to assist the
FPSO/FSU and Offtake Tanker interaction. The diagram in Figure 6.2 provides a
typical level of status reporting.
The principal point to note is that a column is introduced for reporting advisory
messages of any status less than full Green on either side, in an effort to warn
the FPSO/FSU or Tanker of a possible impending Yellow, to allow a discussion
of the offtake between senior personnel, from which it will be decided to either
adopt a Yellow alert status or revert to Green.
It is to be hoped that the advisory category will encourage communication
between the vessels such that safety is enhanced without jeopardising the
contractual obligations.
Figure 6.2 is an indication of principles to be included. The table should include
concerns regarding both the offtake tanker and FPSO/FSU related issues.
The development of the FSOG should be undertaken jointly by the FPSO/FSU
operator and the tanker operator. The ownership of the FSOG lies with the
installation and demonstrates the requirements for offtake from that field. The
FSOG should be included in the JOM. The offtake tanker should carry its own
vessel specific operation standard, and, where this differs from a particular
FSOG, the more stringent standard should be followed.
During the approach, the operational status should be confirmed to be as per the
FSOG green level, and should be periodically confirmed at agreed intervals,
throughout the offtake operation e.g. 1 hour.
Management System
35
Management System
36
Reaction box
+/- 7.5 m surge
+/- 6 m sway
Management System
37
Management System
38
7.
Incident Reporting
7.1
Objective
The objective of this guidance is to improve the safety and efficiency of tandem
loading operations through the sharing of information on related incidents.
7.2
Background
7.3
Incident Reporting
39
2.
3.
4.
Submit the Incident Reporting form together with any additional documents
to the following email address;
[email protected]
7.4
In addition to the voluntary reporting via Oil & Gas UK, FPSO/FSU and offtake
tanker operators are requested to report station keeping incidents involving
Thruster Assist / DP vessels using the IMCA reporting form appended to this
document.
This report should be completed and sent to IMCA on the following occasions:
For any unexpected loss of position and/or heading
For an unexpected loss of functionality or availability of equipment which
results in a reduced level of redundancy leading to a degraded operational
status
When the DP system performance differs from the operators expectations
7.5
Forms
Blank examples of both of the above reporting forms are given in Appendix G.
Incident Reporting
40
8.
References
1)
2)
3)
4)
OCIMF 2009
5)
OCIMF - 1995
6)
OCIMF - 1999
7)
OCIMF - 2008
8)
IMCA M103
9)
IMCA M117
10)
IMCA M139
11)
IMCA M140
12)
IMCA - M150
13)
IMCA M161
14)
INTERTANKO
15)
OPITO
References
41
Intentionally Blank
References
42
Appendix A
Standards Common to both
FPSO/FSU & Tanker
CONTENTS
Page
A1 Hardware Compatibility
45
47
51
Appendix A
43
= active
= passive
= tauthaw
Tanker operating on DP
= dptank
= all
Hence the term Applies active, dptank means the performance requirement
indicated applies only if the FPSO/FSU uses active heading control or the offtake
tanker is on DP.
The standards in Appendix A relate to areas where the Duty Holder and Tanker
Manager have to ensure compatibility between their units, and work together to
ensure the operation is performed within pre-agreed safe limits.
A range of typical values or guidance information is included in {italic text}. This
typically applies to an offtake tanker in the Aframax to Suezmax size range and
is intended as preliminary information to Duty Holders unfamiliar with the subject
rather than as a substitute for correct design.
Appendix A
44
Ref.
A1
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
Hardware Compatibility
Applies to all
To ensure connection integrity
with minimum offshore remedial
action.
1) Verbal Communications
2) Telemetry System
3) Position references
4) Hawser Interface
Duty Holder and Tanker Manager to agree all interfaces during the FPSO/FSU 1) to 6) Initial Assurance: Interface
design and build / conversion phases for any new field. The following areas
review and information exchange
represent the principal interfaces between the two vessels.
during design and procurement.
Check of layouts on FPSO/FSU
1) Agree telephone, fax and / or e-mail details plus VHF channels for initial
tanker. {It is particularly important that
long range contact and exchanging notices and reports. Each FPSO/FSU
all antennae transmitting to the tanker
should have 2 x Simplex UHF channels {primary and backup in case of
have the correct position, separation
external interference} dedicated for offtake operations. There should be
and height on the aft end of the
UHF radios fitted for both agreed channels in the FPSO/FSU CCR, Tanker
FPSO/FSU to avoid interference but
Bridge, ERRV bridge, TAV bridge and minimum 2 x hand-helds on each of
assure alignment with corresponding
the tanker focsle and FPSO/FSU aft deck. {the deck hand-helds should
tanker antennae. Normally they
have headsets to leave hands free and offset surrounding noise. Common
should have clear line of sight astern
send and receive frequency should be used so that hand-helds can
+/- 70 degrees to cater for relative
monitor both sides of conversations between tanker bridge and FPSO/FSU
yaw between the FPSO/FSU and
CCR. The frequencies should be chosen to avoid clashing with other
tanker.}
frequencies used on the FPSO/FSU or adjacent fields}
Factory acceptance tests or contractor
acceptance test when fitted to
2) Agree telemetry frequencies, ID and, if necessary, time slots, with a view to
FPSO/FSU / Tanker to ensure that
minimising interference from surrounding fields.
frequencies, channel ids, address
3) Agree address code and frequency pair for each Artemis beacon. Agree
codes etc are as agreed.
telemetry channel for each DARPS system and notify other fields in UK
st
Verification: Trial of position
and Norway which use the same channel. (Applicable only to 1
references and telemetry by passing
generation DARPS systems)
tankers when FPSO/FSU first
Agree requirements for other systems e.g. RADIUS/RADASCAN, HPR
installed or tanker first proposed
beacons, Fanbeam etc
followed by trial connection for
physical interfaces.
4) Agree size and length of hawser chafe chain to match tanker stoppers.
Agree make-up, diameter, and lengths of hawser messengers to a)match
tanker traction winch, b)fit on tanker storage drum, c)provide sufficient
length for transfer to tanker at a safe distance & d) avoid excess length that
may foul tanker bow thrusters or slow the operation. Agree hawser
transfer mechanism {Normally pneumatic rocket for DP tankers, but
possibly longer messengers and end float run out by TAV for taut hawser
tankers}
Appendix A
45
Appendix A
46
5) Hose Interface
Ref.
A2
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
2) Communications, Position
References & Telemetry
systems (common to both
FPSO/FSU and Tanker)
1) The offtake tanker should normally only approach within 3nm provided the
wind speed, Hs, visibility, and FPSO/FSU motions and yaw rate are within
safe limits, as per the FSOG. {Typical values for DP tankers are
measured 10 min mean wind < 40 knots, Hs < 4.5 m, Visibility > 500 m,
FPSO/FSU heading stable +/- 5 degrees}. {Typical values for taut hawser
tankers are measured 10 min mean wind < 35 knots, Hs < 3.5 m, Visibility
> 1000 m, FPSO/FSU heading stable +/- 5 degrees}. {Note if the
FPSO/FSU heading changes more than 15 degrees during approach then
DP tankers may have to pause and realign whereas taut hawser tankers
may have to abort and recommence approach on the new heading if they
dont have transverse thruster capability. Where taut hawser tankers
have a primary and secondary relative position reference system to the
FPSO/FSU stern and know the FPSO/FSU heading then it can make an
approach when visibility is >500m. If either FPSO/FSU or tanker roll or
pitch excessively on the approach heading then the offtake may have to
be postponed to avoid excessive hawser loads on connection}
2) VHF communications should be established at or before 10 nm. All
possible position references and telemetry systems should be tested and
confirmed operational prior to the tanker approaching within 10 nm with
the remaining short range relative position references tested and
confirmed operational as soon as possible thereafter. UHF
communications should be established and tested for interference at 3nm.
The approach should be aborted if the minimum levels of
communications, position references or telemetry are not available at
each test.
Appendix A
47
Appendix A
48
3) FPSO/FSU equipment
4) Tanker Equipment
4) Tanker Bow Loading System (BLS), cargo lines & all equipment in
machinery space required for close proximity operations should be tested
and functioning, sufficient generators should be on line and available; all
pitch controls including fail safes, all thrusters and steering motors,
redundant power sources should be tested and confirmed functioning {at
10nm range}. Tanker gyros & repeaters should be checked against each
other {before the shuttle tanker approaches within 10nm} to ensure that
they agree {check no gyro is drifting}. The thrusters and generators
should be tested for holding the tanker on the required approach heading
within agreed thrust / power limits {<50% Capability for approach to
continue}. The machinery space should be manned up {at 10nm} and all
electrical and mechanical maintenance that could inadvertently lead to
critical systems tripping should be brought to a close, until after the tanker
has completed the offtake and departed. For DP tankers, the tankers DP
systems should be tested before approaching within 500m of the
FPSO/FSU. The tanker should have both computers and three
independent relative position references working and on line.
6) Helicopter Operations
Helicopter Operations to the tanker should be suspended whilst the tanker
is approaching or departing, and helicopter operations to the FPSO/FSU
should be suspended during tanker connection and disconnection.
Helicopter operations to the FPSO/FSU during tanker approach must be
advised to the tanker beforehand, in order that any potential impact on
position reference signals may be foreseen and reacted to appropriately.
Heliops may be permitted during actual offtake provided the tankers IG
vent plumes are prevented from interfering with the helicopter approach
and departure tracks
Simultaneous Field Operations
Field operations involving other vessels / installations within 3nm of the
FPSO/FPU should be advised by the FPSO/FPU to the tanker in advance
of arrival. This advice should comprise a summary of the
vessel/installation position, planned movements, workscope, restrictions
on movement, and any foreseeable impact on the offtake operation.
Exclusion and restricted zones/sectors may be pre-agreed and
incorporated into the Field Joint Operations Manual to provide generic
guidance on tanker movement restrictions, and to assist with specific risk
assessment where appropriate.
Planned operations involving other vessels/installations within 500m of
the FPSO/FSU during tanker approach and whilst connected, should
either be covered by generic procedural restrictions, including that the
tanker should be downweather, (for routine operations such as supply
vessel operations), or be subject to specific risk assessment (for nonroutine operations). All planned simultaneous operations must be agreed
between all vessels/installations prior to tanker approach.
Where the risk of collision exists between a tanker and other
vessel/installation operating within the field (e.g. within 3nm of the
FPSO/FPU), the field operator may provide a Towing Assist Vessel (TAV)
to further reduce the risk to the tanker and other installation/vessel.
Assurance of equipment compatibility between the tanker and TAV, and
capability of the TAV to provide effective assistance may be provided by
emergency towing trials. A typical tanker operator standard for towing
trials is as follows:
Appendix A
49
Appendix A
50
Ref.
A3
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
1) The tanker should normally only continue offtake provided the wind speed,
Hs, visibility, and FPSO/FSU motions are within safe limits, as per the
FSOG. {Typical values for DP tankers are measured 10 min mean wind <
50 knots, Hs < 5.5 m, , Visibility > 100 m, FPSO/FSU. {Typical values for
taut hawser tankers are measured 10 min mean wind < 45 knots, Hs < 4.0
m, , Visibility > 100 m FPSO/FSU / tanker roll and pitch not leading to
snatch loads on hawser}.
2) The offtake should normally only continue offtake provided the hawser
tension remains within acceptable limits. {The hawser in a DP offtake is
normally slack with tensions < 3%NDBS, so any significant hawser tension
is indicative of a problem. {The hawser in a taut hawser offtake is
obviously used in tension, so it is particularly important that all tension
cycles are recorded and added to keep track of fatigue life remaining.
Typical tension alarm values for DP tankers are as follows. Tanker Master
and OIM consider disconnect if one pull > 19% of the hawser NDBS and
particularly if two pulls exceed 19% in any 30 minute period. Immediate
disconnect if any pull exceeds 27% of the hawser NDBS}.
Appendix A
51
Appendix A
52
3) The offtake should normally only continue if the tanker bow is within
agreed separation limits from the FPSO/FSU stern and if the Tanker
Heading aligns with the FPSO/FSU heading within agreed limits. These
limits together with appropriate actions should be shown on a drawing
within the manual. {Typical values of separation depend on the hawser
and hose length both for DP and taut hawser operations. A typical manual
drawing is shown in section 6. The inner yellow (stop export) and red
(disconnect) tanker limit are placed relatively close to the tankers normal
operating box, to ensure that remedial action is taken before the tanker
builds up forward momentum. The outer yellow and red separations are
intended to release hose and hawser before the equipment is damaged.
The relative heading limit is a measure both of fishtailing and of one vessel
being wind rode whilst the other is current rode. Red should normally take
place by the time the relative misalignment exceeds 40 to 45 degrees.}
4) Communications, Position
References & Telemetry
systems (common to both
FPSO/FSU and Tanker)
5) FPSO/FSU equipment
6) Tanker Equipment
7) Helicopter Operations
Helicopter operations to the Tanker or FPSO/FSU may be permitted during
actual offtake provided the tankers IG vent plumes are prevented from
interfering with the helicopter approach and departure tracks. Any
helicopter operations should be advised to the other vessel beforehand, in
order that any potential impact on position reference signals may be
foreseen and reacted to appropriately.
Appendix A
53
Appendix A
54
Appendix B
Standards for FPSO/FSU
CONTENTS
Page
57
59
B3 Hawser System
62
64
B5 Power Generation/Distribution
67
69
71
Appendix B
55
= active
= passive
= tauthaw
Tanker operating on DP
= dptank
Hence the term Applies active means the performance requirement applies
only if the FPSO/FSU uses active heading control.
A range of typical values or guidance information is included in {italic text}. This
typically applies to a FPSO/FSU in the Aframax to Suezmax size range and is
intended as preliminary information to Duty Holders who are unfamiliar with the
subject rather than as a substitute for correct design.
The Standards distinguish between new and existing FPSOs/FSUs.
An Existing FPSO/FSU means any floating vessel already installed on a UK
field before 1st July 2002 to export produced oil to an offtake tanker in a direct
tandem offtake operation.
A New FPSO/FSU means any floating vessel which is installed on a UK field
after 1st July 2002 to export produced oil to an offtake tanker in a direct tandem
offtake operation. {In this context New includes both newly built facilities and
existing facilities being relocated to a new field}.
Although the standards in this revision of the document differ from the original
document, this document retains the above definitions since the majority of
FPSOs/FSUs referred to are still operating.
Appendix B
56
Ref.
B1
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
FPSO/FSU General
Applies active & unless noted
otherwise as applying to
Passive.
1) To have accepted safety
case for intended duty
To limit pollution risk offshore
To be equipped for stern
discharge
To safely maintain heading
during offtake (if Active).
Else to freely weather vane
(if Passive)
3) For North Sea & Irish Sea: Passive freely weathervaning FPSOs/FSUs
may be acceptable.
For Atlantic Frontier or other areas with very strong currents and
difficult metocean conditions: Active heading control should be employed
to assist the tanker provided the FPSO/FSU can demonstrate adequate
redundancy / integrity. New Active FPSOs should be built to IMO Class 2
equivalent redundancy standards.
4) FPSO/FSU Emergency Shut
Down (ESD) System
Appendix B
57
Appendix B
58
5) New FPSOs/FSUs should be laid out to minimise the escalation potential 5) Concept Risk Assessment for New
FPSOs/FSUs or cost / benefit
from shuttle tanker collision {e.g. Gas flaring and high risk process plant
ALARP analysis for existing
located away from the stern collision zones}. Existing FPSOs/FSUs should
FPSOsFSUs.
evaluate the cost benefit of external structure and fendering to reduce the
shuttle tanker collision risk to such process plant.
Consideration should be given to ensuring that equipment which must be
placed close to the stern e.g. for hose and hawser handling, can resist
foreseeable impacts.
Ref.
B2
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
able to deploy or recover the hawser in a timely 1) Initial Assurance: Design check
winches & foundations versus
Winch to be fitted with automatic spooling gear for
guaranteed hawser weak link load.
Hawser winch and hose winch to be controlled by a
{Load to be applied from all feasible
same point if hose deployed and recovered with
directions due to potential FPSO/FSU
& shuttle tanker position losses}.
Acceptance test on speed and
spooling.
Ongoing Assurance: Planned
maintenance of winch and spooling
mechanism.
Refer to B1 for details of interface to
FPSO/FSU ESD system.
2) The hose storage and recovery system must be appropriate for the field
water-depth and FPSO/FSU deck space.
A) Chute systems should be covered in Teflon or similar to reduce friction
and prevent damage to the hose. There must be adequate recovery
and deployment winches to overcome friction in the chute both ways.
The mechanism for connecting the inboard hose end to the export pipe
should require minimal manual intervention from aft deck crew.
B) Powered reels should be capable of deploying and recovering the
entire hose length {within 10 minutes} and storing the entire length on
the drum. The reel should incorporate fluid swivels to allow export
crude to be pumped from the export system into the hose without the
need to connect the hose to the export pipe work following deployment.
The reel should incorporate a spooling mechanism or hose guide on
the drum surface. These should be suitably lined or coated to minimise
damage to the hose. The hawser winch and hose winch should be
controlled by a single man from the same point if hose deployed and
recovered with hawser.
Appendix B
59
C) Where the hose is suspended from the stern there should be adequate
water depth to prevent the lower end striking the seabed in storm
conditions. A retrieval line should be permanently connected to the
outboard end dry break coupling for recovery. {The hose recovery
system should be powerful enough to recover a 100% full hose without
any need to drain the hose down. All systems should either have
redundant power and recovery motors or an alternative means of
recovering the hose to a safe configuration should the reel motor fail.
All systems including hawser winch should be operated from a safe
position, {i.e. a location clear of the hawser} with good vision of the
hawser and hose going over the stern and preferably protected from
the elements. All systems should have provisions onboard the
FPSO/FSU to flush oil out of the export hose and back to slops tank}.
3) Export Pipework
3) The export pipework must be fitted with a FPSO export shutdown valve
inboard of the hose reel / or other hose coupling. This valve should be
located inboard away from potential collision damage zones}. The valve
should shut {tripping export pumps} on export shut down being initiated
from either the FPSO/FSU or the Shuttle Tanker via a 2-way telemetry
system between the two.
Appendix B
60
Appendix B
61
Ref.
B3
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Hawser system
Where applicable
1 & 2) To provide mooring link
between FPSO/FSU and
tanker
To be suitable to connect to
tanker BLS system
2) NDBS & Load extension properties matched to permit tanker to sit back
slow astern on hawser and still absorb relative vessel motions within low
tension range. {Typical range 80m x 650 tonne NDBS Nylon Superline for
mixed DP / taut hawser operation to 40m double grommet made from 540
tonne NDBS Nylon Braidline for some taut hawser operations with no DP
option.
Appendix B
62
Requirements / Survivability
4) Weak link to break at a predictable load {< 66% of hawser NDBS} which is
greater than the maximum hawser disconnect tension but less than the
load which can damage the hawser winch mechanism, stoppers or
foundations at either end. The weak link is to ensure that the hawser parts
rather than cause structural damage
The decision as to whether a weak link should be incorporated in a hawser
system must take account of the inherent risks involved in activation /
failure of the link. This should include consideration of the potential energy
present in a stretched hawser and the destructive potential of components
catapulted at high velocity following activation / failure of the link.
Appendix B
63
Ref.
B4
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
Appendix B
64
Appendix B
65
8) MBC used if the bow fitting on any of the offtake tankers is not designed to
automatically release the dry break coupling under loads before the hose
ruptures or the FPSO/FSU hose / reel connection is damaged. {If fitted the
position should be near the outboard hose end, the design failure load
must be > max working tension/bending & below the hose burst pressure.
Refer to Ref. 7) OCIMF information paper
Appendix B
66
Ref.
B5
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
Power Generation /
Distribution
Applies Active FPSO/FSU
1 & 2) To reliably power
thrusters, control systems,
references and all normal
hull, production and stern
discharge functions.
To fail to safe condition as a
far as can reasonably be
achieved.
To alert operators on system
malfunction.
Appendix B
67
4) Where thrusters are powered from a single switchboard, the cells should
be separated so that a local fire or fault in one thruster cell will not
immediately affect the other thrusters cell. GF
5) DP Heading Control
5) The DP heading control system must monitor the generator outputs versus
thruster and additional load consumers and excessive power levels should
alarm to alert the operators. Where thrusters are powered by the main bus
an alarm should activate at {50%} power level. Good planning of standby
and on-line generators should be arranged to ensure that sufficient power
is always available, to include for a single generator failure.
6) Power Management
7) Special attention shall be given to the 220V & 24V distribution for DP,
references, sensors, controls, & thrusters, such that failure of a single fuse
will not disable any non redundant system.
On vessels with a single 220 V main board, consumers where single fuse
failure could lead to loss of a critical control function, resulting in potential
loss of vessel position, should have backup supplies from either the 220 V
emergency board or a 24 V system.
Systems where single fuse failure could lead to loss of a critical control
function, resulting in potential loss of vessel position, should have duplicate
power from an independent source. All battery-backed systems should be
fitted with status monitoring such that charger failure or low voltage alerts
the operators.
Appendix B
68
Ref.
B6
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Thrusters & Steering Gear
Applies to Active FPSO/FSU
1 & 2) To provide adequate
FPSO/FSU heading control to
assist tanker connection,
offtake & disconnection
To fail to safe condition as a
far as can reasonably be
achieved.
To alert operators on system
malfunction
Requirements / Survivability
Appendix B
69
Appendix B
70
Ref.
B7
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
Appendix B
71
Note: if a Passive
FPSO/FSU is only accepting
taut hawser tankers which do
not use DP even for
approach or departure then it
needs to provide no position
references other than an
approximate heading (+/5deg). This is only to enable
the tanker to make its initial
run to pick up the
messengers. In this case the
FPSO/FSU may only have a
single gyro and the stated
heading should be
corroborated by ERRV, or
tanker visual during
approach.
6) All FPSOs/FSUs should consider the use of a remote Position Monitoring
System showing data on the offtake tanker position and heading, and
thrusters power consumption, by telemetry, for use by the Marine
Operator / CCR in assessing reference quality and tanker station keeping
versus ESD1 and ESD2 limits.
Appendix B
72
8) The position reference systems and sensors should be UPS supplied and
alarmed to provide DP Class 2 level redundancy under IMO MSC 645 and
alert the DP / ATA operator of any position reference or sensor dropping
out.
Appendix B
73
Intentionally Blank
Appendix B
74
Appendix C
Standards for Offtake Tankers (Offloading FPSO/FSUs)
CONTENTS
Page
77
79
C3 Main Propulsion 1
81
C4 Main Propulsion 2
82
C5 Power Generation/Distribution
83
85
86
Appendix C
75
= active
= passive
= tauthaw
Tanker operating on DP
= dptank
Hence the term Applies dptank means the performance requirement applies
only if the offtake tanker is on DP.
The Standards distinguish between new and existing tankers.
An Existing Tanker means any offtake tanker that either has had its keel laid
before 1st July 2002 or has commenced upgrade to accommodate bow loading
or close proximity station keeping capability before 1st July 2002, and which is
seeking tandem offtake work on the UK sector.
A New Tanker means any offtake tanker that either has had its keel laid after 1st
July 2002 or has commenced upgrade to accommodate bow loading or close
proximity station keeping capability after 1st July 2002, and which is seeking
tandem offtake work on the UK sector. {In this context New includes both newly
built tankers and existing tankers being newly converted to permit offshore
offtake}.
Although the standards in this revision of the document differ from the original
document, this document retains the above definitions since some of the
existing tanker as defined above, are still in operation.
Appendix C
76
Ref.
C1
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
Appendix C
77
5) For North Sea & Irish Sea: Enhanced DP Class 1 tankers may be
acceptable for DP offtake after suitable risk assessment. Non DP or basic
DP Class 1 Tankers working on taut hawser are acceptable.
6) For environmentally sensitive areas and harsh weather conditions:
Class 2 DP tankers should be utilised where possible, though Enhanced
DP 1 may be acceptable if demonstrated to have an equivalent risk level
as DP2.
Appendix C
78
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Ref.
C2
Requirements / Survivability
5) To permit emergency
disconnection
Appendix C
79
Appendix C
80
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Ref.
C3
Requirements / Survivability
Main Propulsion 1
Applies tauthaw with no DP used
during approach, offtake or
disconnection.
To provide adequate
manoeuvrability for
connection disconnection.
Appendix C
81
Ref.
C4
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
Main Propulsion 2
Applies dptank
To provide adequate
manoeuvrability for DP
connection, offtake &
disconnection.
To provide finely controlled
low power thrust for
prolonged periods.
To fail to safe conditions.
To alarm on malfunctions.
5 & 6) Propeller(s)
7) Essential pumps e.g. lube oil, camshaft oil, governor booster, gearbox oil,
fuel, and especially CPP hydraulic pumps should be duplicated and
arranged for automatic change over (without engine trip) powered from
separate cells of the switchboard. {The changeover system should be
such that failure of a fuse in the changeover relays should not trip all the
pumps. An alarm should activate to alert watch-keepers on changeover}.
8) Main engine / CPP should take control signals from both DP computers
and from separate manual control consoles on bridge and within engine
room. The control units should have a backup (non-follow up) control unit.
9) Main engine and especially CPP controls should have dual supplies, one
of which is UPS or battery back up so that equipment continues to function
after a single failure. An alarm should sound to alert operators of failure on
either power supply or changeover. The back-up non-follow up controls
should be powered from a separate third source.
10) Networks
Appendix C
82
Ref.
C5
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Power Generation /
Distribution
Applies dptank
To reliably power thrusters,
engine / steering auxiliaries,
control systems, references
and all normal ships and
BLS functions.
To fail to safe condition as a
far as can reasonably be
achieved.
To alert operators on
system malfunction.
2) to 6) Power generation and
main switch board
2) For existing vessels single switchboards are acceptable but two or more
generators must be on line during close proximity operations.
3) Where thrusters are powered from the main switchboard, the cells should
be separated so that a local fire or fault in one thruster cell will not
immediately affect the other thrusters cell. A bus tie breaker should be
installed, and, where operated in the closed position, it should be
designed to open before generator breakers for both directional and nondirectional faults.
4) The DP control system must monitor the generator outputs versus
thruster and additional load consumers and excessive power levels
should alarm to alert the operators.
5) Shaft alternators should not be used to power thrusters on ships with a
single main engine. Thrusters should in this case be supplied from main
board with at least two auxiliary generators on-line. Shaft alternators can
be used to power thrusters on twin engine ships provided both shaft
generators are functioning and each shaft generator only supplies one
thruster at each end of the vessel. If the main board is also supplied from
the two shaft generators then the board should be split. Alternatively if
the main board is being supplied by auxiliary generators then at least two
shall be on line during close proximity operations.
Appendix C
83
7) Special attention shall be given to the 220V & 24V distribution for DP,
references, sensors, controls thrusters, such that failure of a single fuse
will not disable any non redundant system.
On vessels with a single 220 V main board, consumers where single fuse
failure could lead to loss of a critical control function, resulting in potential
loss of vessel position, should have backup supplies from either the 220 V
emergency board or a 24 V system.
The 24V distribution should preferable by split into 2 sections Systems
where single fuse failure could lead to loss of a critical control function,
resulting in potential loss of vessel position, should have duplicate power
from an independent source. All battery-backed systems should be fitted
with status monitoring such that charger failure or low voltage alerts the
DP operators.
Appendix C
84
Ref.
C6
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Requirements / Survivability
5) Thrusters should be arranged so that they do not fail to full pitch in either
direction and that azimuthing gear (if fitted fails to set).
6) Thrusters and individual steering gear motors should as far as reasonably
practicable be powered from separate sources with the use of UPS so that
no single power failure could result in the loss of sufficient thrusters or
rudders to cause a loss of tanker position or heading.
7) Thrusters & Rudders should take control signals from both DP computers
and from separate manual control consoles near the DP console on bridge
and within engine room. Even on DP Class 1 vessels thruster controls
should be powered from two sources, one of which is UPS or battery back
up so that a single failure will not result in loss of more than one thrusters.
8) Independent rudder angle, thrust & azimuth indicators should be installed
close to the DP console, fed from a separate circuit than the DP rudder /
thruster pitch angle / azimuth signals. Any thrusters power failures or
thruster failures should sound alarm to alert operators.
Appendix C
85
Ref.
C7
Function / {Description} /
Applicability
Appendix C
86
Requirements / Survivability
5) Displays
6) Visual References
Appendix C
87
Intentionally Blank
Appendix C
88
Appendix D
Oil & Gas UK Model FPSO/FSU & Tanker
Acceptance System
1. Introduction
The following acceptance process is aimed at enabling Duty Holders to
ensure that they can demonstrate taking adequate management actions to
ensure that offtake risks are ALARP.
2. Acceptance of New Vessels Intended to be Regularly Used in the Field
(Primary / Secondary Pool Tankers)
New FPSOs/FSUs or tankers should be assessed and accepted by the
following process
Review design, verification and operational documents as listed in table
D1 for FPSOs/FSUs and, if required, table D2 for offtake tankers.
Where a third party supplies the tanker or FPSO/FSU a vessel
information folder should be prepared by the third party and submitted
to the Duty Holder.
Review the FMEA study, the FMEA trials report, the Annual DP Trials
report, the FSOG, and follow up and close out of any
recommendations.
Send the field Joint Operations Manual to the new FPSO/FSU or tanker
to give the crew time to familiarise themselves with the field particulars
and procedures. This also gives the new vessel an opportunity to
review and comment on any field procedures or equipment that could
lead to complications with their vessels.
Assess the new FPSO/FSU or tanker by an on-board audit to check
that equipment, crew training and experience comply with the required
performance standards / assessment matrices (either from this
document or field specific requirements or Safety Case or Written
Scheme). If any serious shortfalls are found they have to be rectified
against an agreed schedule, e.g. by hardware rectification or by adding
a supplementary mooring master or other supplementary crew whilst
experience is built up.
Check annual DP trials, close out and the recent audit / inspection
record on board, together with the crews understanding of their DP
system and failure modes. The assessment of crew competence
should be carried out in the field, offloading from a particular
FPSO/FSU to a particular tanker, so that it is not purely paper based.
Ensure that the ATC / DP control software and all telemetry and
position reference frequencies are adapted to reflect the field
requirements.
Carry out a field test confirming that all communications, telemetry links
and relative position references actual communicate, that all ATC / DP
software functions correctly and that the FPSO/FSU and tanker(s) are
compatible for offtake. Usually the field test is carried out at the start
and during an offloading trial or at the start of the first offloading.
Appendix D
89
Appendix D
90
capacities
propulsion spec.
thruster spec.
DP system
position reference systems
bow valve closing times
confirmation shuttle tanker was subject to FMEA & FMEA
revisions, findings and recommendations
confirmation that vessel is free of outstanding Conditions of Class
and OCIMF SIRE non-conformances.
Confirmation that Annual DP Trials were performed less than 1
year ago
crew training and experience matrices, particularly numbers of
offloadings performed from the particular type of FPSOs/FSUs
(active or passive)
remedial measures to increase experience on the day in order to
meet the minimum training & experience requirements for the
type of facility concerned (e.g. passive FPSO/FSU).
Tanker operator places field specific offtake joint operations manual
and other operational documentation on board the tanker.
If tanker is to operate on DP then the DP software must be adapted for
the specific field (e.g. install field specific files).
If the tanker and crew is acceptable based on the above then proceed
to field but Duty Holder should be given the opportunity of putting a
representative onboard.
Field test position references, telemetry and DP if fitted before final
close approach and connection.
Complete field test procedures.
Appendix D
91
FPSO/FSU
Only equipment
critical to tanker
station keeping as
per the standards
as above
as above
Appendix D
92
Offtake Tanker
Photograph
General arrangement plan
Tank capacity plan
Fire control and safety plan
Bow loading arrangement drawing
Bow valve type & shut-in time (ESD)
FMEA + FMEA revisions, to include
trials reports
Only equipment
critical to station
keeping as per the
standards
as above
as above
Appendix D
93
Intentionally Blank
Appendix D
94
Appendix E
Offtake Concept Risk Evaluation
The use of shuttle tankers to export crude oil from the field provides an extremely
valuable service and assists the exploitation of marginal or remote reserves.
However it is important to reduce the inherent risks of tanker export at all stages
of a development project. The maximum risk reduction impact can often be
achieved for least expense by designing out hazards at the concept design or
concept selection stage of a project. Concession holders and Duty Holders have
often applied only limited resource in a very limited time-scale to this stage of a
project. This can, and in some cases has, led to offtake risks being unexpectedly
higher than envisaged, resulting in accidents and high financial consequences.
It is recommended that concession holders and Duty Holders perform an
effective risk assessment of all practicable offtake options as part of their concept
selection process for all future field developments. Concept selection should be
based on the demonstration of ALARP risks for the development as a whole.
Particular care should be applied at this stage before selecting untried offtake
solutions or applying existing solutions in a new area having different metocean
parameters to those experienced before.
Duty holders should consider all of the offtake options that may be practicable for
the development and take life of field costs and risks into account in making the
ALARP selection. The risks evaluated should include: The hazards to each vessel arising from incidents occurring on the other
vessel or due to close proximity operation.
Environmental / pollution risks as well as safety.
Risks to life of field production uptime.
Even where the installation is likely to be a FPSO or FSU, consideration should
be given to pipeline export, remote loading buoys, submerged loading systems,
as well as stern offtake.
The offtake concept risk assessment should consider the following factors: Tandem loading versus pipeline or remote surface / submerged buoy
Exporting oil back through the turret and out to a remote loading system or
existing pipeline obviously removes the need to have a tanker in immediate
proximity to the manned FPSO/FSU. This reduces the risk of low energy tanker
collisions and may also reduce the major accident hazard potential of a highenergy tanker collision. However other factors need to be taken into account in
the ALARP assessment such as: Ullage availability, tariff structure, age and condition of any existing
pipeline; plus the life cycle cost and risks associated with installing an
export swivel, riser, pipeline spur, tapping into any existing pipeline and
decommissioning at the end of field life.
Tanker black out collision risks. When a tanker performs a tandem offtake
operation it is located close to and down weather from the manned
FPSO/FSU. Thus the inherent risk of a high consequence collision
following tanker loss of propulsion, during off-take, may be lower than if
Appendix E
95
the tanker has to offload from a remote loading point in the immediate
vicinity which will on occasions be upwind of the manned FPSO/FSU.
The life cycle costs and risks associated with installing, inspecting,
maintaining and decommissioning an export swivel, riser, seabed line and
remote loading system. Note that the environmental risks of a remote
system may be higher than from an FPSO/FSU even if the personnel
consequences may be lower.
The lost satellite development potential if swivel paths and riser space are
used for oil export.
Passive weathervaning versus active heading control on the FPSO / FSU
There are a series of passive weathervaning FPSOs/FSUs in the central North
Sea which currently have a good offtake safety record and have the merit of
being simple with very little opportunity for FPSO/FSU equipment failure or
operator error to cause a sudden loss of heading during offtake. FPSO/FSU
heading misalignment problems can normally be controlled by the offtake tanker
applying hawser tension in manual control should this become necessary. There
is relatively little loss in the useable weather window by using taut hawser in the
central North Sea.
Experience suggests, however, that the use of passive weathervaning
FPSOs/FSUs may be less attractive in other parts of the UK sector where the
wind, wave or current climate is significantly more severe. (E.g. the Atlantic
frontier, or areas with very high currents). Offtake tankers by nature of their
size, shape and thruster configuration have very limited ability to move sideways
to follow the stern movements of a passive weathervaning FPSO/FSU without
getting seriously out of alignment, in these more stringent metocean conditions.
It becomes more attractive to use active heading control on the FPSO/FSU to
help damp out fishtailing and permit the offtake tanker to adopt an optimum
heading to the prevailing conditions. Active heading control also has side
benefits in providing the ability to limit roll motions in certain sea conditions.
Whenever active heading control is selected it is important that the system is
designed with sufficient redundancy and fail safe features to prevent single point
failures causing major change in heading. This involves installing thrusters
having sufficient power and performance to cope with the expected metocean
conditions as well as just providing redundancy. Active heading control does
however come with a step increase in complexity, potential failure modes,
redundancy requirements and operator training, so would need careful
evaluation before implementing, at the concept stage or on existing vessels.
DP Offtake Tanker operation versus Taut Hawser operation
There is a long history of successful taut hawser tandem offtake operations in the
central North Sea and indeed world-wide. Taut hawser has the merits of having
few potential failure modes and relatively uncomplicated operator options should
something unexpected occur, once the hawser has been attached and the
propeller locked slow astern. There is relatively little loss in useable weather
window by using taut hawser in the central North Sea. The loss in useable
weather window increases in parts of the UK sector having more severe wind,
wave or current conditions and the use of taut hawser mode becomes less
attractive. DP tankers can connect and remain connected in slightly higher seastates. In extremely harsh operating areas (e.g. Atlantic Frontier) the tanker
must be equipped with thrusters having sufficient power and performance to
cope with the expected metocean conditions as well as having adequate
Appendix E
96
Appendix E
97
Appendix E
98
Appendix F
Example Checklists
These are examples only and not necessarily suitable for all FPSOs/FSUs and
Tankers. However, the layout of the columns should be considered as a
template.
Appendix F
99
___/___/_____
Vessel: ____________
1. On nomination of tanker
n/a
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
n/a
Tanker
n/a
Time /Check
To
1-3
From
1-2
Comms
method
1-1
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
[FPSO
Name]
n/a
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
n/a
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
1-7
n/a
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
1-8
n/a
Tanker
1-4
n/a
1-5
n/a
1-6
Appendix F
100
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
d/t
n/a
2-2
n/a
n/a
2-3
n/a
n/a
2-4
n/a
n/a
2-5
n/a
n/a
2-6
n/a
2-7
n/a
VHF
Time /Check
n/a
To
2-1
From
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
[FPSO
Name]
n/a
d/t
Appendix F
101
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
3-2
VHF/
e-mail
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
Time /Check
From
To
Comms
method
Sail Tanker to email ETA at 10nm, crew list, OBQ and crew
Prev competency matrices. Tanker to identify if there are any
Port deficiencies against required experience or training levels.
3-3
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
3-1
d/t
d/t
3-4
10 nm
3-5
10 nm
3-6
VHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
3-7
VHF
Tanker
Appendix F
102
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
d/t
To
From
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
VHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
4-3
VHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
4-4
10 nm
VHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
4-5
VHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
4-6
VHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
4-7
10 nm
VHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
4-8
VHF
Tanker
4-9
VHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name]/
Name] Tanker
VHF
Tanker
4-1
10 nm
4-2
[FPSO
Name]
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
d/t
NB: In the event that the approach is aborted during this phase, the new approach should resume
Checklist at Step 4-1 (i.e. at a range of 10 nm).
d/t
Appendix F
103
5. From 10 nm to 3 nm
Time /Check
To
From
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
[FPSO
Name]/
Tanker
5-1
UHF
5-2
3 nm
UHF
Tanker
5-3
3 nm
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
5-4
3 nm
UHF
[FPSO
Name]
[FPSO
Name]
5-5
3 nm
5-6
UHF
Tanker
5-7
3 nm
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
NB: In the event that the approach is aborted during this phase, the new approach should resume
Checklist at Step 4-1 but at a range of 3 nm.
Appendix F
104
d/t
d/t
6. From 3 nm to 500 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
6-2
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Time /Check
From
To
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
6-1
d/t
Tanker to:
6-3
3000
m
3000
[FPSO Name] to initiate the Telemetry System.
m
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
6-5
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
6-6
1000
Tanker to activate the BLS operator panel.
m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
6-7
1000
Select Approach mode on the DP system.
m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
6-8
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
6-9
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
d/t
NB: In the event that the approach is aborted during this phase, the new approach should resume
Checklist at Step 4-1 but at a range of 3 nm.
d/t
Appendix F
105
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Time /Check
From
To
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
Tanker to:
7-1
500 m
7-2
500 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
7-3
500 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
7-4
300 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
7-5
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
7-6
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
7-7
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
7-8
150 m
7-9
100 m
UHF
Tanker/
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
[FPSO
Name]
Deck /
Tanker
7-10
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
[FPSO
Name]
Deck /
Tanker
d/t
d/t
7-11
UHF
Tanker/
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
7-12
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
7-13
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
d/t
7-14
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
d/t
Appendix F
106
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
d/t
NB: In the event that the approach is aborted during this phase, the new approach should resume
Checklist at Step 4-1 but at a range of not less than 2000 m.
Time /Check
UHF
To
From
Comms
method
7-15
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
Appendix F
107
8. Commence Offload
8-1
70 m
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name]/
Name] Tanker
8-2
70 m
UHF
Tanker
8-3
70 m
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
8-4
70 m
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
8-5
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
[FPSO Name] to reset the trip on the Main Oil Export pump
and prepare for restart. Repeat the shut down test with
70 m
[FPSO Name] initiating the Export ESD1. Complete the
Record boxes below. Permit to Load to be re-established.
UHF
8-6
FPSO
Cargo pump(s)
tripped
Bow coupler
closed
secs
secs
secs
ESD1 initiated
from FPSO
secs
secs
secs
8-7
2 seconds
20 seconds
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
Remarks
25 seconds
If Tanker has not carried out an ESD2 test in the last four
bow loading cargoes, ESD2 test to also be done with a
70 m
cargo pump running, but without dropping of hose and
hawser.
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
8-8
70 m
8-9
70 m
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name]/
Name] Tanker
8-10
70 m
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
Appendix F
108
d/t
d/t
ESD1 initiated
from Tanker
Max allowable
[FPSO
Name]
Tanker
Export ESDV
closed
Time /Check
To
From
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
8-11
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
8-12
[FPSO Name] to start the first Main Oil Export pump. Deck
70 m watch to monitor Export Hose on poop deck. Metering
Technician to be informed. Print off Stability Data.
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
8-13
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
8-14
70 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
8-15
d/t
Signature
d/t
d/t
NB: In the event that the offtake operation is aborted during this phase, once the Tanker is in a
safe location, [FPSO Name] and the Tanker are to fully review the reason and ensure this has
been recorded before any reconnection operation is commenced. A new approach should
resume at Checklist Step 4-1.
Time /Check
To
From
Comms
method
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
Appendix F
109
9. During Offload
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
UHF
Tanker
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
Time /Check
To
From
Comms
method
9-1
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
9-2
70 m
9-3
70 m
9-4
70 m
9-5
9-6
[FPSO
Name]
d/t
Signature
NB: In the event that the offtake is aborted at any time during the loading, once the Tanker is in a
safe position, [FPSO Name] and the Tanker are to fully review the reason and ensure this has
been recorded before any reconnection operation is commenced. A new approach should
resume at Checklist Step 4-1.
Appendix F
110
d/t
10. Disconnection/Departure
UHF
[FPSO [FPSO
Name] / Name] /
Tanker Tanker
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
10-3
70 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
10-4
70 m
UHF
Tanker/ [FPSO
[FPSO Name] /
Name] Tanker
10-5
70 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
10-6
70 m
UHF
[FPSO
Tanker
Name]
10-7
70 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
Deck
10-9 350 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
10-10 500 m
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
10-11 3 nm
UHF
Tanker
[FPSO
Name]
10-8 100 m
[FPSO
Tanker
Name
e-mail
e-mail
[FPSO
Name]
e-mail
-
Tanker
VHF
Tanker
Time /Check
70 m
To
10-2
From
Comms
method
10-1
Manual
Reference
Dist
Step
d/t
d/t
d/t
10-13 3 nm
Tanker to:
10-14
VHF
[FPSO
Name]
Signature
d/t
d/t
Appendix F
111
Intentionally Blank
Appendix F
112
Appendix G
Incident Report Forms
Appendix G
113
Incident Summary
(Single sentence description of what occurred)
2.
Date / Time
(when the incident happened)
3.
Location
(general location e.g. Central North Sea, WoS
etc)
4.
Installation Name
(voluntary leave blank if desired)
5.
Offtake Tanker
(voluntary leave blank if desired)
6.
Weather Conditions
(wind, sea, visibility)
7.
Description of Incident
(summary of what happened )
8.
TLG Reference
(which section(s) of the guidelines does the
incident relate to)
e.g. Ch.4.3.11 or App. A3 4) 4)
9.
10. Attachments
(list any submitted attachments which help
describe the incident - e.g. sketches,
photographs, full incident report, IMCA report etc)
11. Further Information Available
(advise whether further information will be made
available if requested )
Yes / No
Appendix G
114
IMCA
Station Keeping
Incident Form
for
Thruster-Assisted
Vessels/FPSOs/FSUs/DP
Tankers/EWTs/Semis/Flotels, etc.
Date:
Place:
Reported By:
Client:
Position:
Appendix G
115
This form is to be populated by the Thruster Assisted Vessel or the Non-DP Vessel. The
separate DP Vessels form should be returned by the DP Vessel involved.
2.) Environment
Wind Speed:
Wind Direction:
Wave Height:
Visibility:
Current Speed:
Current Direction:
DP Current or
Real Current:
Water Depth:
Thrusters On-Line:
(selected to DP)
Switchboard Status:
Thrusters on StandBy:
Open:
Closed:
Generators OnLine:
Generators on
Stand-By:
(available for
immediate start)
(selected to DP)
(available for
immediate start)
HPR
Artemis
FanBeam
Taut
Wire
DGPS
DARPS
Other
Available
Stand-By
On-Line
Preferred
Sensors: (populate fields with numbers)
Status
GYRO
VRS
WIND
Other
Available
Stand-By
On-Line
Preferred
Appendix G
116
Turret
Heading Control
Damping
Position Control
Other
b) Unmanned?
a) Manned?
Approaching
If offtake operations were in progress what was
the status?
Connected
Departing
Thrusters On-Line:
(selected to DP)
Switchboard Status:
Thrusters on StandBy:
Open:
Closed:
Generators OnLine:
Generators on
Stand-By:
(available for
immediate start)
(selected to DP)
(available for
immediate start)
Artemis
DGPS
DARPS
Other
VRS
WIND
Other
Available
Stand-By
On-Line
Preferred
Sensors: (populate fields with numbers)
Status
GYRO
Available
Stand-By
On-Line
Preferred
Appendix G
117
5.) Sketch (Vessel outline, heading, location of pos. ref., relative positions, hawser
length, tracks of FPSO/FSU stern and Tanker, etc.)
7.) Narrative Description of Events: (if available attach internal incident reports)
Appendix G
118
Were the factors leading to the incident adequately covered by the circumstances within
the training and familiarisation sessions with the DP Operators?
Do you believe that the DP Operator, if faced with a similar situation now, would react in
a different way?
Appendix G
119
11.) Comments
Please add any comments or suggestions that have not been fully covered in the report.
Have you attached any alarm printouts (DP/VMS/PMS), internal reports and
correspondence that may assist in the analysis of the incident?
Both DP Vessel and Thruster Assist Vessel/Tanker should return separate forms.
Appendix G
120
Appendix H
Guidance in Respect of Non-Tandem
Offtake Concepts
Preamble
This Appendix recognises that some of the specific guidance in the main
document may not be applicable to non-tandem offtake operations, and just as
importantly there may be other aspects that the tandem operations guidelines do
not consider. This Appendix, based on the experience of non-tandem Operators,
lists some of the additional factors that Operators may use as a Checklist if they
intend to utilise a non-tandem DP offtake concept. This list should not be treated
as necessarily complete since each system will have unique features and an indepth review should be carried out to ensure all hazards have been captured.
Other offtake concepts already exist in the UK and elsewhere, that also use DP
tankers, but not in a tandem methodology. Notable existing systems are SAL
and round FPSOs/FSUs (such as the Sevan units), but other concepts may also
be viable.
Crew Training
The following are considered to be the main points to achieve a successful startup:
involve Tanker Operator shore personnel in the offtake regime concept
development;
involve Tanker crew personnel as early as practicable;
ensure Tanker onshore and offshore personnel are part of creating the
Offtake Operations Manual, so it is truly joint;
consider the less tangible features, such as if there is no FPSO there to
sight;
build a specific syllabus for crew training for offtake operations, making
these joint if possible;
control training of future personnel.
If the concept is new, then neither the FPSO nor the Tanker personnel will be
familiar with it. It is likely, and normally considered beneficial, that the FPSO
personnel will be involved with their unit during at least the commissioning
phase; they may even be part of the design of the offtake methodology.
However with a new concept, or a concept that is not in common use, the Tanker
personnel, specifically the bridge staff but also the deck crew to handle
equipment during the connection, would not have that automatic exposure to the
offtake methodology. Experience has shown that presenting a Tanker with an
Operations Manual, however clear and pretty the drawings and sketches may be,
is insufficient preparation to remove as much risk as is practicable. Early
involvement of the Tanker Operator is recommended, and to make at least the
onshore management a part of the development of the offtake regime.
Joint training sessions at suitable briefing meetings, and ideally also at a
simulator, i.e. FPSO and Tanker personnel together, can be a considerable
advantage, especially with a new offtake concept. This activity;
Appendix H
121
a)
allows all personnel to understand the issues as they are seen from the
other vessel, so that they can tailor their own actions to make it easier for
the other and to avoid misunderstandings; and
b)
It is suggested that using training sessions in a simulator to develop all but the
final details of the offtake regime could be counter-productive as it can lead to
confusion with some participants as to the final regime and procedure.
Clearly the training requirements are reduced if only one or two Tankers are
involved. Nevertheless some care is required to ensure that sufficient personnel,
not just in each crew but on each watch/shift, have received the full intended
training program. If this is not the case, leave rotation may make a future offtake
operation less safe.
Some offtake concepts may not weathervane around the FPSO. A typical
tandem loading system has one advantage in that typically the FPSO appears as
a huge obstruction to the DPOs in the Tanker wheelhouse; it is an obvious visual
reminder and ready check that the Tanker is generally in the correct position.
However, if the point of rotation is just a nominal piece of seawater, especially if
the FPSO is out of the normal arc of vision or is too far away for an unconscious
worthwhile judgement of range, then the Tanker DPO is effectively relying on
instruments. This intangible missing feature of some offtake regimes may make
it prudent for additional simple instrumentation to clearly illustrate whether the
Tanker is correctly positioned or not.
Development of a specific written syllabus for training each DPO and Master,
and where necessary deck crew, that can be followed for all future new starts, is
recommended. Use of DP CAP and periodic simulator training should be
included on a regular basis, to recognise that while Tanker personnel generally
gain lots of experience with tandem offtakes, due to the small number of the new
offtake concepts installed there is less opportunity to gain experience.
DP Program
When considering the DP program for a new concept the Operator should:
ensure sufficient time is allocated to building a new DP program and
having it tested;
consider 3rd party testing of a new DP program, specifically a simulator;
ensure there is a control method for future versions of the DP program.
It is usual for each offtake location to have a field specific DP program, and the
Tanker switches to this program at the start of his approach for connection.
A new offtake concept at the very least is likely to require different ranges and
bearings from the weathervaning centre than previous programs, and may
require an entirely different DP application. In either case it should be borne in
mind that the programmers, however experienced they may be, could
inadvertently have missed a line or character of code, or not understood one of
the implications of changing a line of code when adjusting a previous program.
While DP equipment and program suppliers will most probably undertake their
own tests, it is strongly recommended from experience that a 3rd party
independently review all new DP programs, against all normal and abnormal
operational criteria and event sequences, in order to capture any anomalies.
Use of a simulator can be a very useful tool for this activity and it also provides
Appendix H
122
the simulator staff with the opportunity to become familiar with the offtake regime
in preparation for training sessions.
This process can take a few months and should be started in sufficient time to
ensure that a full review and test programme can be maintained, and that this
stage is developed in sufficient time for crew training to commence.
The DP program for a new offtake concept, once it has seen some operational
use, may also be tweaked to account for operational experience; it can then
become important to check that each visiting Tanker does have the correct
version of the program.
Orientation
The main point when considering orientation (of the Tanker) is to ensure that
drift-off safeguard generally exists.
One of the principles of a standard tandem offtake system is that the Tanker is in
a blow-off situation; if the Tanker blacks out, or the mooring connection (if any)
and the hose fail then the Tanker will naturally pass clear astern of the FPSO,
unless the Tanker personnel take contrary action. There are some exceptions,
rapid change of tide direction, or a flat calm and the hawser/hose weight pull the
two ships together; but generally tandem loading Tankers do not have to
consider drift on scenarios with a FPSO.
However a different offtake concept may not necessarily achieve this natural
drift-off capability. In considering drifting of Tankers it should be noted that
Tankers do not typically stay on a heading into the weather, but may well start to
change heading to be beam on, and thus have a wider drift path than their own
beam. Determining a safe drift off clearance should be made based on available
air drafts of both vessels taking into account all operating conditions including
heel, trim and motions in waves of the Tanker, and consideration of clearances
from risers and moorings in different FPSO draft, heel, trim and motion
conditions. Consider also the underwater features refer to subsection below.
Hose Angle
When considering the hose angle, the following main points should be
considered:
side loads from hose catenaries;
ensure operating limits of thrusters for station-keeping and for bow loading
systems are taken into account;
contact with the Tanker hull, consider dynamic analyses;
model emergency release scenarios;
consider hose tension in black-out scenario.
Tandem loading systems have the hose leading ahead from the tanker bow, and
due to a planned maximum heading difference, the hose does not often lead at a
high angle from the tanker bow. Some offtake concepts, however, may require
higher angles in order to obtain sufficient weathervaning arcs of operation, and
this will likely require some additional considerations, and likely some
compromise. These considerations may include:
station-keeping capability, noting that some of the thruster power may be
used to counter the sideways pull on the bow from the hose catenary.
This pull can be lessened by having a high declination leaving the bow
coupler, but this can lead to contact with a bulbous bow;
Appendix H
123
at the extreme the limits of the bow loading system may be reached for
example 35 to port or starboard. It is recommended that banging against
such stops is designed out of the offtake regime;
contact during dynamic motions, such as bad weather. Time domain finite
element simulation of hose systems, with each end being moved
according to the motion characteristics (RAOs = Response Amplitude
Operators) of each vessel, is quite feasible with a number of software
packages. Such analyses should follow normal good practice as regards
hose element length, hose axial and bending stiffness values (easily
obtainable from hose suppliers, even if not on their normal specification
sheets), damping, and wave profiles (period, height, steepness and type
including a number of random wave trains not just regular waves);
emergency hose release from the tanker bow coupler should also not be
ignored, as a hose end valve contacting in free fall to a bulbous bow can
conceivably puncture hull plating, and/or damage the hose integrity.
Dynamic analysis programs can also typically model emergency release
scenarios;
it is well understood that the weight of the hose can bring a Tanker into
contact with a FPSO, in calm weather and if the Tanker is blacked out. A
longer hose string will increase the pull on the tanker, and precautions that
may apply to a typical tandem arrangement may not be a sufficient
safeguard for an initially larger FPSO/Tanker separation distance. For
example if in a Tanker blackout situation a tandem operation allows the
separation to close to 50 m (from say a normal operating range of 75 to
80 m) before a ESD2 must be initiated, this can be sufficient distance to
stop the Tanker continuing forward to make contact with the FPSO; but if
the Tanker started at 200 m, by the time it reaches 50 m its forward
momentum would result in contact with the FPSO.
Underwater Features
The following points should be considered:
consider dropped object protection from the hose end valve, both for
integrity and hose recovery;
ensure sufficient vertical clearance from all underwater architecture;
review hose disconnection locations taking account of possible drive-off
speeds.
A typical tandem offtake operation results in the tanker bow being at an expected
fairly standard distance from the centre of rotation of the FPSO, and it is normal
practice to ensure that subsea features, such as pipelines, riser bases, manifolds
and well heads, have suitable protection from dropped objects. One specific
case of a dropped object is the consequences of an ESD2, or, with less control
on location, an ASD2.
If the offtake regime does not result in the Tanker also weathervaning around the
same centre as the FPSO, then the Tanker bow may be covering a much greater
area of potential hose end valve drop locations. This should be carefully
reviewed, not just for protection of the subsea asset and potential safety and
environmental consequences if their integrity is breached, but to ensure that
there is a means of recovery of the hose, and that snagging risks are eliminated.
The normal tanker bow operating zone, or the probable zones where a hose
disconnection may occur, taking account of possible drive off accelerations (up to
Appendix H
124
Appendix H
125