A number of guidance documents have been developed to provide operators of floating offshore installations a framework to approach the adoption of hull risk based inspection strategies as an alternative to the periodic and prescriptive classification survey scheme. Key to the adoption is the formal evaluation and approval from the class society of the RBI plan based on the quality of the design and operational data and the RBI methodology to be applied. In my view the implementation of this approach seems to best fit the introduction of new assets, where structural fatigue dynamic analysis software models are more readily applied incorporating any limitations from the original design criteria. For an older asset moving into the parameters of life time extension would there still be tangible benefits and how would this transition period be managed? Is there a test case where a FOI has managed this transition successfully and what lessons would they feedback to the industry as a whole?