FPSO Experience Database JIP FPSO Research Forum 16 October 2002 Santiago de Compostela, Spain Robert SpongABS Consulting Presented by:

Presentation Outline  Brief Background ABS/ABS Consulting  Motivation for Experience Database JIP  Objectives of JIP  Description of Tasks  Cost & Schedule  JIP Contact Information

ABS Bureau & ABS Consulting  Classification Society  2,500 employees in 300 offices in 70 countries  Extensive marine & offshore experience  Approximately 1/2 market share of worldwide FPS’  Approximately 1/4 market share of tankers  Marine & Offshore Consulting  1,200 staff in 50 offices worldwide  Numerous support services  Risk assessments (RBIs, QRAs, HAZOPs, etc.)  Advanced engineering  Blast modeling & testing  Special studies (JIPs, RPs, etc.)

Recent Projects Related to Proposed JIP  In-service inspection planning  Risk based plans  FPSOs (P-35, Zafiro Producer)  Semis (Thunder Horse)  Fixed platform fleets (BP West Java, Unocal Thailand)  Prescriptive plans (Holstein Spar, Neptune Spar)  Risk studies  Hull configuration risk (Su Tu Den FPSO)  Mooring configuration risk & reliability study (P-37, P-43/48 FPSOs)  HAZID, HAZOPS & Reliability studies (CNG Carriers and LNG & GTL FPSO concepts)

Motivation for Experience Database JIP  Limited operating experience to draw upon when making decisions regarding FPSO hull integrity  Typically draw upon tanker operating experience for  Corrosion rate estimates  Construction detail performance  Coating performance  FPSOs are not tankers  No dry docking  Cargo content vary  Offloading frequencies are higher  Site specific

Motivation for Experience Database JIP  Continued growth of FPSO fleet increases need for a more complete set of experience based operational data (across company lines)  Past efforts to collect FPSO data generated general information but not quantity or detail required to  Assess current design and maintenance practices  Develop firm foundation for implementation of RBI or other inspection techniques Central Theme: “Need for more FPSO specific operating experience.”

Objectives of Experience Database JIP  Aggressively collect experienced based operating data to evaluate influence of FPSO/FSO specific operations on hull integrity and determine implications on design and while on site  Evaluation of influence of FPSO specific operations on structural integrity to enhance decision making process related to FPSOs  Design  Maintenance and inspection  Operations

Objectives of Experience Database JIP  Provide Guidance and Application Tools  Lessons learned  Assessment tools  In-service inspection tools

Information Flow Diagram... Operator 1 Operator 2 Operator N Experience Data Set Lessons learned Applicability of industry practices Tools and guidance on risk based inspection applications Task 2 & 3 - Data Collection Task 4 -Evaluation Literature Review ABS Tanker Database ABS & Other Society Survey Archives Task 5 - Documentation

Data Collection  ABS internal data  Survey data (FPSO/FSO & tankers)  Condition assessment data  Technology studies  JIP participant internal data  Inspection data  Cargo composition  Operational profile  Corrosion protection  FPSO features  Repair history

Data Collection & Data Recording  Collection methods  Participant interviews  Response to written queries  Interface with participant FPSO data owners  Main groups  Operating units  Clean up data  Remove relationship between data and vessel/operator (i.e., ensure operator anonymity)  Organize and categorize data  Identify erroneous and missing data

Evaluation & Deliverables  General Data Set Evaluation - “Lessons learned”  Trends  Alternative approaches used by different operators for integrity management  Risk mitigation alternatives  Influence of operating conditions on hull integrity  Numerical Data Set Evaluation (inspection guidance)  Spatial zoning of corrosion  Confidence level for probabilistic corrosion rates  Effect of inspection on corrosion rate estimates

Evaluation & Deliverables  Identify areas where additional data collection is warranted and provide recommendations on collection methods and procedures  Develop foundation for future application and guidance on alternative inspection planning techniques Example Rule-Based Inspection Plan

Schedule & Cost 4th Quarter st Quarter 2003 Commitment Deadline 31 Dec 02 Proposal Sent Out August rd Quarter 2002 Meet with Interested Participants 1st Quarter 2004 JIP Kick-off 31 Jan 03 JIP Completion Jan 04  Approximately one year duration  Cost: US$39,000 per participant  Minimum number participants: 7

JIP Contact Information Bret Montaruli Manager, Offshore Engineering Other contacts: Frank Puskar Vice President Primary Contact: Robert Spong Ph: Europe Contact: James Phipps Ph: 44(0)