LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE COMMISSIONING, START-UP

AND THE OPERATIONAL PHASE OF A SUBSEA PIPELINE

by

Ad Pijnacker Hordijk (Project Manager Large Projects, NV Nederlandse Gasunie)
Rein Bolt (Technical Manager BBL Company V.O.F.)

Keywords: strategic infrastructure, offshore pipeline, commissioning & start-up,
operational issues.




1. INTRODUCTION
In December 2006, after a construction period of 2.5 years, a dedicated Project Team successfully
completed the construction of the 235 km subsea BBL pipeline and
handed over the pipeline and facilities to the pipeline operator. BBL is
an acronym for Balgzand (the Netherlands) Bacton (the United
Kingdom) pipeLine. The pipeline has been in commercial operation
since 1 December 2006.
The BBL pipeline system consisting of a compressor station in NL, an
on- and offshore pipeline (NL+UK) and landing facilities in UK is owned
by BBL Company V.O.F., which company is a partnership between
Gasunie BBL B.V. (60%), Fluxys BBL B.V. (20%) and E.ON Ruhrgas
BBL B.V. (20%).

2. OBJECTIVES
This paper describes the organisation and challenges during the commissioning and start-up phase in order
to successfully hand-over responsibility to the operational phase team. The major operational experiences
during the first year of operation will also be addressed. Due to the
fact that the dedicated Project Team and contractors disappear
after the operational handover, the remaining teething troubles had to be analysed and solved by the
operator. One of the lessons learned was that these challenges could be avoided, if there was a closer
cooperation between the Project Team and the operator during the last phase of the construction and the
handover to the operator.

The project involving the construction of all BBL assets was divided into three different specific parts. These
parts were:
A new compressor station with electrically driven compressors in the Netherlands at Anna Paulowna
(Balgzand area);
The offshore pipeline from Anna Paulowna up to the United Kingdom
(Uk) at Bacton consisting of an onshore pipeline including dune
crossing, a valve station just before the dune crossing and an
offshore pipeline to Bacton including 2 cofferdams;
A gas-treating station in Bacton in order to filter, heat, measure and
control the gas flow before it is delivered to the adjacent network
operator.


3. ORGANISATION
Many companies have been and are still involved in the construction, commissioning and start-up and
operation of the BBL pipeline system from the Netherlands towards the United Kingdom. The gas is
transported from the Gasunie grid in the northern part of Holland by compressor owned by BBL Company
VOF towards the Uk where the gas is warmed up, measured and flow control by Shell as the operator and
transported towards National Grid as the shipper in the Uk.
The overall project was divided into the 3 previously mentioned parts, see figure 1b, each consisting of a
separate engineering and construction team. These teams were to hand over the pre-commissioned
functionality of the given parts to the overall commissioning and start-up team.
Figure 1b : Project geographics

Figure 1a : BBL geographics
As often in multidisciplinary projects, the last activity is under time pressure, due to delays in the previous
activities. This means that it is of the utmost importance that the procedures and methodologies used by the
commissioning and start-up teams are well prepared and are not jeopardized by any unforeseen delay.
Since the end date was not allowed to be shifted by even one minute, due to huge financial penalties that
were included in the contracts with shippers, it was in everybodys interests to succeed in continuous gas
transportation from 1 December 2006 at 06:00 GMT onwards!


The project was organised in such a way that BBL Company V.O.F., as owner of the assets, received the
keys of the project (a turn key project) at the handover date.
The project team, under the overall responsibility of the Project Executive, was divided into separate project
responsibilities for construction and for commissioning and start-up. Moreover the commissioning and start-
up preparations started more
than one and a half years
before the actual finishing
date. In this respect, there
were 2 official handover
ceremonies for the three
above-mentioned parts.

4. METHODOLOGY

4.1 Common
This paper will focus more on
the details of the
commissioning and start-up
and the following activities
during the first year of
operation than on the
construction activities.
First of all, a commissioning
project plan was derived
and a commissioning team was put together. Since it was very clear from the beginning that the
commissioning would be under enormous time pressure, a very detailed plan was generated and verified by
internal and external experts. Furthermore the plan was discussed with all parties involved in the overall
project, in order to get acquainted with the interfaces and expectations of individual key persons and
contractors responsible. The commissioning team also prepared a risk register for all the actual activities
Static Testing
(Design Reviews)
Dynamic Testing
(Protocol, scenarios, deficiencies, change and re-test)
UK/NL
laws
EN/NEN/BS
Design codes
PFD's + P& I D's + drawing,
specifications, permits, contract
purchase documents
Commissiong & start-up documents
Contract Documents,
and Specifications
Manufacturer Specifications and Drawings
NSW01E,
NSW02E,
OGM 12
Detaill drawings, hook-ups,
ISO's etc.
Procedures, detail test plans per unit, detail schedule, criteria, deviation
procedure, management of change,...
Manufacturer Factory Acceptance Test
Contractor Site Acceptance Test
(components tests, loop tests, unit tests)
Pressurizing, functional gas tests,
performance tests
Limit state tests
!!
Standards
Functional
spec
Basic
Design
Detail
Design
Procure-
ment
Manuf.&
Construct
The
desired
SYSTEM
FAT
MA
Pr
commis-
sioning
Commis-
sioning
Start-up
Run-in
periode
in
operation
Safety
clearance
Start
End
TEST METHODOLOGY
V-Model
Safety Test
(functional test, utility systems tests,
safety systems tests, strength and leak tests)
AVI
Figure 3 : Test methodology
Figure 2 : Overall system layout
NG BBL Company VOF NV Nederlandse Gasunie
HPSD
3x
A-591
A-616
3x
2x 2
A-644
B
l
e
n
d
i
n
g

s
t
a
t
i
o
n
F
i
l
t
e
r
i
n
g

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
U
S

m
e
t
e
r
i
n
g

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
H
i
g
h

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

S
h
u
t

D
o
w
n

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
o
r

s
t
a
t
i
o
n

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
3x
O
f
f
s
h
o
r
e

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
FCV 3x
4x
F
i
l
t
e
r
i
n
g

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
U
S

m
e
t
e
r
i
n
g

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
H
e
a
t
i
n
g

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
F
l
o
w
c
o
n
t
r
o
l

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
E
x
p
o
r
t

s
e
c
t
i
o
n
1 2 3 4 5 7
Items
Export
pipeline
NG
6
Export Station
Bacton
Offshore Pipeline
Compressor
Station
Filtering
US-metering
HighPressure ShutDown
Blending
station
V
a
l
v
e
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
Place Bacton Northsea Anna Paulowna
Juliana
Dorp
Asset
Owner
HIPS
H
i
g
h

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

s
h
u
t
d
o
w
n
S
c
r
a
p
e
r
t
r
a
p
O
n
s
h
o
r
e

+

V
a
l
v
e
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
NG NV Nederlandse Gasunie Operator Shell Uk
during a number of commissioning workshops. The risks (~ 100 items) were prioritized by probability times
consequences in a range of 1-25 and further divided over Turn Over System (TOS) numbers and categories
such as business risk, HSE danger and the risk of concurrent activities. The team also initiated mitigation
measures for all the high and medium priority risks and even for a number of low priority risks as well. The
Risk Register not only increases the confidence of supervisors and principal, but also provides more insight
into the controllability of the work to be carried out.
A test plan was developed according to the V-shaped model as indicated in figure 3. The idea is that the
verification and dynamic testing process on the right hand side of the V will be executed against the
engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) process on the left hand side. This is one of the reasons
that commissioning should be involved during the EPC part of the project.
The test methodology as indicated in figure 3 will be completed with the specific standards and norms on the
left hand side of the V-model and the procedures and standard test requirements that are applicable for each
of the indicated balloons along the V-model line in order to get a fully accepted and verified system.

A specific model was drawn especially for installation, in order to achieve full understanding by all parties.
Normally construction or EPC contractors are working according the construction-driven or discipline-driven
schedule. This means that items will be finished, delivered and handed over according to the schedule of
their discipline contractors and subcontractors. Due to the fact that the achievement of the contracted finish
date was under extreme pressure, the
relationship between construction
contractor and commissioning team was
changed into a so called commissioning-
driven schedule relationship. This meant
that the items that were needed first were
also constructed, delivered and handed
over first according to the commissioning
plan. In order to be able to know which item
should be scheduled first and which last,
one needed to know upfront how to execute
the commissioning. Obviously the schedule
which allowed for the fastest and most
efficient commissioning was selected. One
can distinguish between the commissioning
of different systems, clusters or loops as
indicated in figure 4. In the BBL project, we
chose to execute the commissioning work
by means of a Turn Over System (TOS).
Each TOS has a number of loops. In total
44 TOS s were identified and over a
thousand loops were established. All
information regarding equipment, each loop including associated test certificates, calibration procedure,
other inspection dossiers and the commissioning activities were inputted into the Windows Project
Completion System (WinPCS). This system, which was already in use by the construction contractor, was
further enlarged and used by the commissioning team to keep easily track of the progress of the work and
also to pay immediate attention to the remaining scope of the work, the next week work front and the non-
agreed items. These items were divided over three categories in order to provide the team with the
opportunity for controlling the work front with the highest priority items.
Due to the tight timeframe of the commissioning, it now became possible to overlap construction and
commissioning activities and not to wait to start commissioning until the last construction activity had been
handed over from construction to commissioning.

4.2 Commissioning of the pipeline
During handover, the commissioning team responsible for the onshore and offshore pipeline received a
pipeline from the construction team which had just been successfully hydrostatically tested on both sides.
The pipeline was connected to the rest of the pipeline system with golden welds. To be able to carry out the
golden welds, the pressure of the strength test was released and the parts where the golden welds were
executed were totally free of sea water. This meant that the hydrostatic pressure was off the system and
some air locks were in the system due to the golden welds.
The activities that were carried out during commissioning and start-up :
Further dewatering;
Drying and depressurizing;
Purging valve cavities and barred T;
Nitrogen filling and venting;
BBL CSU Approach
system system system system
cluster cluster
loop loop
cluster cluster
loop loop
turn turn
over over
system system
turn turn
over over
system system
Shippers
CCP
Mimic
Interface panels
PCS
Field wiring & Equipment
Masterplan Commissioning Installations
TMX
Nimbus,
Cosmex,
Midas,
.......
UCP
HPSD ESD BDP GDP
Utilities
fuelgas, powergas, oil, water, hvac,
HSV, LSV, No-break
JB
EOV
FCV
PCV
GOV
CS
Hand-over procedure to owner and operating company
FAT
SAT
GASUNIE WAS HIER!
All inspection
dossiers in
WinPCS
GASUNIE WAS HIER! GASUNIE WAS HIER!
All inspection
dossiers in
WinPCS
Figure 4 : Commissioning approach
Pressurizing, initial gas fill and first gas flow;

The challenges arising during these activities which will be discussed in more detail were :
Salinity since the hydrostatic strength test was carried out with sea water;
Hydrocarbons at a process area which is still under construction;
Dispersion and venting;
Water dew point of the gas during first gas flow;
Continuous gas flow at handover date;

4.2.1 Overview
Early in the project, the commissioning team started to investigate literature and previous commissioning
experiences especially relating to the North Sea. Based upon that knowledge, a tender document was
established and put on the European market as a request for quotations. During the evaluation of the bid
documents, the most effective commissioning method was discussed with the bidders. The construction
contractor for the onshore pipeline decided to perform a hydrostatic strength test on the pipeline with water
coming from the Noord Holland canal, whereas the construction contractor for the offshore pipeline decided
to use filtered, but extreme salt seawater instead of the sweet water of the Noord Holland canal. These basic
starting points meant that the method plan also needed to be developed regarding how to get rid of the salt
deposits in the pipeline. After the commissioning contractor had undergone extensive selection procedures,
all these items, drying method, salinity, air pockets, HSE and QA/QC points were discussed and put into the
contractors method plan. The estimated drying time, water dew point criterion, number of runs, number of
trains versus volumes of water between cleaning pigs, overall schedule and confidence probabilities were
calculated or estimated upfront.
Then the plan was discussed with project staff, the Shell project team responsible for the engineering,
construction and commissioning of the receiver station in Bacton as well as the Shell plant management
responsible for the operational health and safety at the Bacton plant. A few challenges needed to be added
to the pipeline constructors method plan. These items were safety, dispersion of gas and nitrogen, cleaning
of the barred tee and valve cavities, noise contours, working hours, demonstration of cleanliness and
environmental issues. Besides a lot of meetings with all the staff involved, alignment sessions were carried
out to harmonise the approach and goals of the pipeline commissioning. The commissioning team was
fortunate in having the opportunity of a feedback meeting with experienced staff from Statoil in Stavanger.
The plan was presented and discussed, however major changes in the pig train were proposed by Statoil.
Their experts came up with the idea of getting rid of the two separation pigs between the air, nitrogen and
gas volumes. A pig in the very dry air slots could easily ignite the bone dry air leading to undesirable
consequences, such as a fire and all kinds of subsequent damage to the inner and outer side of the pipeline.
Taking the proposal into account, the team encountered another challenge that had to be resolved. The
dispersion of two different gases along the 235 km of pipeline had to be calculated and dealt with on site.
Gasunie onshore pipelines in the Netherlands are normally filled directly with gas, not having nitrogen to
separate the air from the gas. By changing the philosophy, adding nitrogen as a means of separation and
propelling the nitrogen slot without high seal BiDi pigs, the commissioning of the BBL pipeline was different
compared, for instance, to the IUK pipeline, which was commissioned in 1998.

4.2.2 Dewatering
The dewatering actually started just before the golden welds had to be welded. There were golden welds at
the Bacton cliffs and at the valve station Julianadorp. By removing the test heads at either side a lot of water
(and pressure) was removed from the pipeline straight away. However, after handover from construction to
commissioning, salty sea water was still present in the pipeline. Which part of the pipeline was filled with
which type of water and for how long was calculated well before the start of the pipeline commissioning.
Since the period during which water was in those parts was quite short, less than one month at least, the
team took the decision after one of the contractor alignment sessions not to use a corrosion inhibiter. One of
the positive results was that the permit for the dewatering could be obtained much more quickly. As there
A-644
Bacton
Anna Paulowna Julianadorp
Figure 5 : Overview of the BBL on- and offshore pipeline
were different types of water in the various parts of the onshore and offshore pipeline, the following points
were determined at an early stage in the project and discussed with all the relevant people :
Number of cleaning runs;
Number of trains versus volumes of
fresh water;
Estimated drying time within P90
confidence limits;
Number of compressors to propel
the pigs with:
o availability and redundancy;
o noise (24hr operation);
o permits;
Heating possibilities
Calibration of sensors
Risk mitigating measures

The team decided to have one run with a
pig train consisting of 10 pigs. This pig
train was propelled by oil-free, dry
compressed air and was specially
designed to :
Dewater the pipeline;
Remove the salt deposits from the pipeline wall;
Swab the pipeline with dewatering pigs;


Figure 7 : pig train overview and direction <==

Most of the sea water was moved away by the first high seal BiDi pig. The Gasunie laboratory calculated
that, by having 4 slots of fresh water to dilute the salt sea water from the pipe wall, the salt content would be
ultimately less than 1000 ppm, which is a reasonably acceptable value. This is of course dependent on the
assumed parameters such as amount of fresh water, film layer at pipe wall, slippage of water along the high
seal pigs etc. The salt content is expressed in Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). The salt contents of the various
slots were measured before entering into the pipeline. The fresh water coming from the Noord Holland Canal
had a value of 400-600 ppm which, (compared to the salty sea water, 35.000 ppm) is considered to be
sweet water. The slots put into the pipeline at Anna Paulowna came from the installations potable drinking
water system and was filtered up to 50m. After removing the pigs from the pig trap at Bacton, the salt
content was measured again. The salt contents were:
Fresh water slot between pig 1 and 2 957 ppm
Fresh water slot between pig 2 and 3 594 ppm
Fresh water slot between pig 3 and 4 363 ppm

Since the pipeline from Julianadorp up to Anna Paulowna was hydrostatically tested with almost fresh water
from the Noord Holland Canal there was already a slot of fresh water in the pipeline of 4km. In order to save
the fresh water at Juliandorp, a high seal BiDi pig was introduced into the pipeline at the valve station just
before the dune tie-in and golden welds were completed. All the other pigs were introduced into the pipeline
system via the pig trap receiver in Anna Paulowna, see also figure 5. The pig train started with 3 high seal
BiDi pigs separating 4 slots of fresh water. Valves were opened in Julianadorp to get rid of potential air
pockets. The 4
th
pig in sequence was an Electronic Calliper Pig (ECP), which will be discussed in a later
paragraph. Then another 6 high seal BiDi pigs followed to separate the bone-dry air slots, as can be seen
from figure 7.
The dewatering and cleaning train was started on 27 September 2006 and finished on 25 October, when the
last pig was received at Bacton

4.2.3 Cleaning
The team decided that there should be only one cleaning run with 10 BiDi pigs and different slots of fresh
water and dry air instead of various runs, because of the time pressure. There was also mutual agreement
for using only one direction for the pigs, namely from Anna Paulowna (NL) towards Bacton (UK). Since the
Seawater 4km H20 H20 400m3 H20 400m3 H20 400m3 500m AIR 500m AIR 500m AIR 500m AIR 500m AIR 500m AIR Line Vol AIR
Offshore VS Julianadorp 3 Highseal BiDi pigs at CS Anna Paulowna ECP pig ---------------------------------------------- 6 Highseal BiDi pigs at Anna Paulowna -------------------------------------------
Figure 6 : different pipeline sections
offshore pipeline was full of salty sea water it was upfront calculated how many volumes of fresh water one
would need to get a clean pipeline .

All valve cavities and the barred-T at Bacton were also cleaned by means of flushing. The barred T was
even inspected with a borroscope in order to prevent any dirt in the gas receiving installation at Bacton.

4.2.4 Drying and depressurization
The pipeline was further dried with oil-free compressed air. The drying started on 26 October and was
finished on 31 October, less than one week later, with an exiting air dew point of -33C at atmospheric
pressure, see figure 8. The pipeline was continuously dried with air
dryer than -40C with an injection flow of approximately 15,000
Sm/hr. The short drying time was due to :

The rapid pipeline depressurization after dewatering.
bleeding off at high speeds removed water from the pipeline
and/or dissipated residual water from the pipeline wall;
The quick depressurisation with the use of flow control valve
and air silencer at the receiving end during the continuous
high volume, low pressure, dry air purge;

4.2.5 Calliper pig
One of the pigs dividing the fresh water slot and dry air was the
Electronic Calliper Pig (ECP). The ECP was ordered because the
pipeline also would have an intelligent pig run by means of a MFL-
pig at a later stage. In order to save time for a separate verification
pigrun, the team decided to have the ECP-pig as a verification tool of the pipeline inner diameter in the train
of pigs necessary for the drying process. The MFL pigrun and consequently the ECP pig was ordered with
another company. Unfortunately the coupling in the ECP-pig broke after a few kilometres whereas no
information was gathered due to a malfunction in the defected sensors. It was found out that the coupling
broke because of a flaw in the security device of the coupling and the variations in (acceleration) speed of
the pig train as a result of air pockets and difference in medium (water versus air) over the ECP-pig.

4.2.6 N2 filling
After the pipeline was depressurized, it was filled with a (large) slot of nitrogen of almost 50,000 Sm. The
nitrogen was injected over a period of 2 days. The nitrogen acted as an inert interface between the bone-dry
air and the natural gas full of ignitable hydrocarbons.



4.2.7 Gas pressurizing
Since the pipeline commissioning team was very successful and the compressors at Anna Paulowna were
not even commissioned at that time, the team decided to make use of a short cut from the measuring station
directly into the scraper trap. This extra, temporary, aboveground pipeline was installed by the Gasunie
Special Department executing stopple and split-T operations at full pressure, troubleshooting calamities and
incidents at full gas outflow. Heaters from the pipeline commissioning contractor were used to heat up the
gas to a minimum of +20 C. Since filling up the pipeline at once
was not commercially viable due to specific shipper contracts,
filling up at a speed of 2.5 m/s was planned. It was strongly
recommended that the project team should not make use of BiDi
pigs between the bone-dry air and the nitrogen. The reason for
this was that the friction of the pig with the pipeline wall could
ignite the bone-dry air with all kind of consequences. Therefore
the basic approach eliminated the pig between the nitrogen and
gas . As a result of that, the dispersion of air and nitrogen and,
moreover, the nitrogen and gas, had to be calculated at various
(driving) speeds and parameters, see figure 9. Using a back
pressure controller specifically installed at Bacton for that
reason, avoided the compression of the nitrogen slot and the
amount of nitrogen was about a third of the total length of the
BBL pipeline. Purging the nitrogen slot at high speed also helped
minimise the mixing of nitrogen and gas, resulting in maintaining the integrity of the inert nitrogen slot. The
spread of the dispersion of gas and nitrogen was also calculated upfront in order to know precisely when the
Bone dry air ~75 km N2 Natural gas
Figure 8 : drying temperature vs time
Figure 9 : gas dispersion
back pressure controller (towards air) had to be closed. As soon as these high concentrations of
hydrocarbon gas were measured upon discharge from the temporary silencers at Bacton, the pipeline was
filled with gas and the venting system was closed. First of all the system was pressurized up to 8.8 bar on 8
October 2006.

4.3 Commissioning of the compressor station
The commissioning of the compressor station was carried out by Gasunie personnel with the help of several
contractors. Normally and certainly in former times, the construction of an installation was handed over after
the construction was completely finished. The construction of Anna Paulowna was outsourced to an EPC
contractor. Due to the time
pressure to finish well before the
contractual gas transporting date,
commissioning activities had to
start during the construction
phase itself, as shown in figure
10. It was also preferable to hand
over the construction to the
commissioning team in the order
that was determined by the
commissioning team as the most
effective and efficient one. For
instance, the safeguarding
systems and the earthing system
were the first to be handed over.
44 turnover systems were
identified containing many
different disciplines. The
commissioning team had just
started their work while the EPC
contractor had already almost
finished the engineering part. Due to the time pressure, we would have liked a commissioning-driven
construction. But in practice that was not really possible anymore due to agreed procurement and
construction schedules. After several meetings and discussions with the construction contractor, the
commissioning team was able to generate a flawless start-up plan, as shown in figure 11, based upon the
previously discussed handover system and the construction contractors work front. Since during the
commissioning, the plant was
powered up and was pressurized
with natural gas a bit later, the
formal handover from construction
to commissioning also had to be
initiated from a point of view of
security, health, safety and
environment.
More than a thousand loops were
verified, checked and put into
operation while the construction was
carried out in parallel. This was
made possible by several useful
alignment sessions that were
organised at an early stage by the
Project Executive for all contractors
on site. It goes well beyond the aim
of this paper to describe all the
turnover systems in detail. It is clear
that many people have worked long
hours to reach the ultimate goal of transporting gas to the UK before 1 December 2006. The commissioning
of the compressor station encountered challenges during the commissioning time. These challenges were:
The emergency no-break system had an unknown problem in the synchronisation software, and the
coupling between motor and generator did break while performing an ESD test on the system. The
incident was solved a long time before the operational date;
The compressor units were ordered as a carbon copy of a Shell subsidiary company the NAM GLT
project. The thrust-bearing disks, however, were not large enough to compensate for the high
differential pressure across the compressor, and as a result of this, the maximum power could not be
flaw 1
APH
04/10/2005
s
y
s
t
e
m
2
s
y
s
t
e
m
1
s
y
s
t
e
m
n
c
l
u
s
t
e
r
1
c
l
u
s
t
e
r
n
c
l
u
s
t
e
r
2
m
.
.

lo
o
p
s
Commissioning Start-up
flaw 3
flaw 2
tos =
turnover
systems
Flaws
to be
avoided
Flawless Start-up
R
e
a
d
y

f
o
r

s
t
a
r
t
-
u
p
F
i
n
a
l

a
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
p
e
r

t
u
r
n
-
o
v
e
r

s
y
s
t
e
m
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
f
i
n
a
l
i
s
e
d
s
y
s
t
e
m
..
.
H
a
n
d
-
o
v
e
r
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
Preparation
EPC Contract
Construction &
Pre-commissioning
tos ... 1
tos ... 2
tos 38
Initial delivery GTS A-011
Shortcoming list GTS A-012
Technical transfer certificate GTS A-013
Shortcoming list GTS A-014
1 2 3 5 6
Ready for continuous operations GTS A-015
Shortcoming list GTS A-016
Operational Control hand-over OBA
Shortcoming list GTS
Project transfer (PO) OPD 3-16
As-built information NSA-02-N
Close-out evaluation OPD 3-24
Performance test
CSU (Pre-) Commissioning & Start-Up on site
max 1 year
R
e
a
d
y

f
o
r

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
4
1
2 3
4
5
6
According to NSA-01-N, version 3, 01-05-2005
Operational
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
APH
04/08/
2005
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
t
e
a
m
F
i
n
a
l

a
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
Time
01/12
2006
01/04
2007
01/11
2006
15/08
2006
01/06
2006
1
Engineering
Preparation
Pre- commissioning
Commissioning
Start-up
Construction
FAT
SAT
Pre- commissioning
Performance
tests
Run-in
2
3
4
5
Operational
01/12
2005
15/08
2005
Maintenance contracts preparation Assistance of maintenance contractors
maintenance in place
Commissioning Schedule & Responsibilities
O
w
n
e
r
p
l
a
n
t

r
e
a
d
y

f
o
r

s
t
a
r
t
-
u
p
I
n

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
a
r
t

c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
s
t
a
r
t

p
r
e
-
c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
r
e
a
d
y
s
t
a
r
t
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l

c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
f
i
n
i
s
h
e
d
see
next
sheet
CSU (Pre-) Commissioning & Start-Up on site
EPC Contract
Procurement
Operational
schedule level 3
safety plan
resource allocation
Figure 10 : concurrent activities
Figure 11 : Flawless start-up
reached. The team decided to use spares kindly offered by NAM GLT to change the thrust-bearing
disk for a larger one, which resulted in a 3-week delay. Despite good progress in the commissioning
sphere, this delay was accommodated well before the operational date;
Since not one of the compressors was operational before the offshore pipeline had to be pressurized
with gas, there was no gas route available within the Anna Paulowna installation to supply warm gas
towards the pig receiver as the starting point of the BBL pipeline towards the UK. Consequently a new,
temporarily aboveground pipeline shortcut had to be installed with an extra heater in order not to
jeopardize the pipeline commissioning critical path.

5. RESULTS

The BBL pipeline system with associated installations and equipment was put into operation on 26
November 2006, while the commercial gas flow started on 1 December 2006 06:00 GMT and has been in
operation ever since.

Schedule overview
Construction Commissioning
Start Finish Start Finish
Planned 15-08-06 08-05-06 04-12-06
CSNH
Actual 12-06-06 19-11-06
Planned 29-01-06 05-10-06 24-09-06 31-10-06
Pipeline
Actual 29-01-06 28-10-06 19-09-06 15-11-06
Planned 01-12-06
1
st
gas in
Actual 25-11-06

Starting-up
The gas started to flow on 25
th
of November. At first the water dew point was quite high as can be seen in
the adjacent figure 12. The water dew point decreased over time. The only problem at the time was that the
water dew point was not quickly enough at
the specified contract value. This meant
that National Grid, as the responsible
shipper, ordered to stop the gas flow at
18:15. The next day the gas flow started
again and was approximately at 15:00
hours below the contracted value. The
high water dew point was not caused by
the pipeline, but was associated with the
poor drying of the receiving installation at
Bacton. As National Grid was able to mix
the first gas with other gases we were
fortunate enough to start up the BBL
pipeline during the weekend of 25 and 26
November 2006. There was during start-
up a close contact from the Central
Command Post (CCP) in Groningen with
operational staff from Shell in Bacton,
project staff at the compressor station Anna Paulowna and of course operational staff at Warwick from
National Grid. As can be seen from figure 12 we still like to point out that if we extrapolate the decreasing
waterdewpoint value versus time, it can be concluded that we would already be under the contracted value
at approximately 20:00 the same day we started with the first gas to flow from the Netherlands towards the
UK.

6. EVALUATION
Looking back, the authors would like to emphasize that the overall BBL project team was successful in
having the gas flowing a few days before the planned commercial date. From the beginning it was
considered quite a challenge to reach the project objective, but even 3 years after the handover date, it is still
amazing to remember that all the project team members, contractors and colleagues were so successful.
Lessons learned sessions were held a few months after the handover. A few issues will be mentioned
without further discussion:
Project responsibilities should be well specified and separated;
Figure 12 : waterdewpoint versus time
Commissioning and start-up teams should be well prepared and work together with engineering and
construction teams and, as a result of that, start work at least 1 years before the system is to be
operational;
The overall responsible commissioning manager should also be involved during the engineering
process;
It is desirable to have one engineerings manager responsible overall for all separate parts

Although Gasunie, on behalf of the BBL Company VOF (as the operator of the BBL compressor station,
onshore and offshore pipeline system), has encountered 2 major incidents with the emergency bearings of
the electrically-driven motors of the compressor units, the overall availability and security of supply has been
on average very high. The investigations of the Root Cause Analyses are still in progress and, in the
meantime, mitigating measures have been taken by the compressor unit supplier.
After the completion of the project, Gasunie (as the operator) took over the responsibility for operating the
pipeline and for maintaining the compressor station and the offshore pipeline. Shell Operations took over
responsibility for maintaining the BBL facilities in Bacton.
Taking over responsibility means that the operator should have sufficient knowledge and background
information about the new system to be able to fulfil all obligations related to these responsibilities.

The main lessons learned from the owners point of view are:
The Project Team was acting on behalf of BBL Company VOF and built the pipeline system in
accordance with the Functional and Project Specification and the jointly agreed Project Execution
Plan. Due to the fact that BBL Company was not directly involved during the construction phase, the
Project Team reported regularly to the BBL partners about costs, health, safety and environmental
issues and progress of the project. During the construction phase, there was limited involvement by
the new future operator of the pipeline. The first reason for this was the fact that a new compressor
station was built. When there is a large modification project involving one of the existing Gasunie
stations there is always much more involvement by the operator. The second reason was that new
technologies were used. It was the first time that the Gasunie Project Team had to install large
electromotor-driven compressors at a compressor station instead of gas turbines or gas-driven
reciprocating motors. The last reason was the tight time schedule for completing the project. More
involvement from third parties would endanger the completion time of the project;
When the project was handed over to BBL Company as the owner and Gasunie as the operator of
the pipeline system, the normal handover procedure was followed. A special handover document
contained project information on the construction of the offshore pipeline with regard to relevant
future operational aspects. No alignment meetings were organised between the BBL Project Team,
Gasunie, as the operator and BBL Company, as the owner, to emphasize and to explain the
background of the importance of these operational aspects;
The offshore pipeline was hydrostatically tested at a normal hydrostatic test pressure. A MFL
(Magnetic Flux Leakage) pig run to demonstrate the integrity of the pipeline was ordered by the
Project team, however the BBL Company and its partners had to carry out this run, due to the fact
that the system was already handed over. This type of MFL pig run gives a blueprint of the integrity
of the pipeline. The project team and BBL Company VOF agreed to carry out an MFL pig run six
months after it became operational. At that time, the project team was already disbanded and BBL
Company took over the responsibility for the pig run. During the discussions of the results with the
MFL contractor it was clear that the knowledge of the members of the project team responsible for
the construction of the offshore pipeline would have been extremely valuable to explain all kind of
anomalies;
After closing out the BBL Construction phase, an inventory was made of all punch list items. During
the first months of operation it became clear that the punchlist was much longer than agreed during
the handover ceremony. Costs relating to the outstanding punchlist items were also much higher
than forecast by the Project Team;


7. SUMMARY / CONCLUSIONS

The project team was very successful in delivering the pipeline and associating installation in due time, while
(as always) the construction period of time is enlarged, eating so to speak valuable time of the
commissioning and start-up. However if the necessary commissioning and start-up activities are well
structured, well prepared upfront and harmonised with all the different groups of people that are working on
the project and within the responsible, operational departments.
Moreover if the project risks are recognised and mitigated for it is indeed possible to be successful as has
been well proven.

The period of time required to construct a pipeline system (3 years) is much less than the period of time of its
whole operation (50 years). After three years of operating the pipeline system, BBL Company and Gasunie,
as the operator of the pipeline, are of the opinion that the main lesson learned is that the new operator of the
pipeline should be much more involved/integrated during the design and construction phase.



8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors like to acknowledge the good work of their colleagues of engineering-, operational-, asset
management- and gas transportation departments in the first place. Only with good cooperation and good
understanding it is possible to run a large project as the discussed ones. We are looking back to a very
successful project and like to acknowledge the good work of all people and companies involded in this
project. Especially we like to acknowledge the excellent work of the company Halliburton, which was
contracted for the drying and pressurizing of the BBL on- and offshore pipeline. Moreover we like to thank
employees of Statoil of their kindest reception and feedback on our offshore commissioning plan.
All parties worked closely together in order to allow the project team to successfully deliver the BBL pipeline
system on time. It has been a great challenge, a lot of work and long hours, but everyone has been working
as one TEAM, meaning Together Everyone Achieves More.