Dänemark, Deutschland – Bauarbeiten für Rohrleitungen, Fernmelde- und Stromleitungen, für Autobahnen, Straßen, Flugplätze und Eisenbahnen; Nivellierungsarbeiten – HDD Landfall Bornholm -25/18035

Technical and Organizational Solution As a basis for the Contracting Authority’s evaluation of Technical and Organizational Solution, the tenderer should submit a conceptual design and methodology describing the proposed execution of the Works. The submission should demonstrate the technical feasibility of the proposed solution and the Tenderer’s understanding of the project conditions. The submission shall include: • Overall methodology, construction approach and site layout (onshore and offshore), including key interfaces and work sequencing • HDD design concept, including alignment, entry/exit points, preliminary geotechnical considerations and drilling methodology • Duct system design, materials, installation methods and key equipment, including handling and installation principles • Environmental mitigation measures, including specific measures to prevent and manage loss of drilling fluids, as well as survey concept and approach to control and verification of the installed works • Assessment of the methodology under the expected metocean conditions. • Survey and control concept, including methodology for setting out, tracking and monitoring during drilling operations and approach to verification of the installed alignment and duct system • The Tenderer shall identify and assess key risks related to the proposed solution and describe how such risks are avoided, reduced or managed. • CV for key personnel: A. Project Manager B. Site Manager C. Drilling Supervisor D. Marine Supervisor • Project Management Concept • Quality Management Concept The Technical Solution will be evaluated on the basis of the credibility, feasibility and level of detail of the submit ted conceptual design and methodology. Emphasis will be placed on: • Demonstrated understanding of project conditions, constraints and key risks • Feasibility, robustness and efficiency of the proposed construction and installation methods • Technical soundness of the HDD design and duct system solution • Effectiveness of environmental mitigation measures, including management of drilling fluid losses • Adequacy of the proposed survey, control and verification approach • Solutions demonstrating practical, well-structured and clearly described methodologies, with a focus on HSE risk reduction and safe execution, will be considered favorable. • A robust vessel set up for the offshore activities, including information on backup vessels and operational weather limitations for each vessel, will be considered favorable. • Positive consideration will be given to key personnel demonstrating relevant experience from projects of a similar nature, size, complexity, and risk profile to the Contract, as well as a proven track record of success ful project delivery, including performance in relation to time, quality, safety, and stakeholder manage ment. • Positive consideration will be given to proposals demonstrating a clear, robust, and project-specific approach to project management, including effective management of risks, schedule, resources, interfaces, and stakeholder engagement, as well as proactive measures to ensure efficient and timely project execution. • Positive consideration will be given to proposals demonstrating a systematic, robust, and project-specific approach to quality management, including the prevention of non-conformities, effective control of critical activities, efficient management of deviations and corrective actions, and measures ensuring consistent and documented quality throughout the execution of the Contract. An overall evaluation will be made of this sub-criterion. For the sub-criteria “Technical Solution” it is a minimum requirement that the tenderer reach a minimum score of 4 for the tender to be compliant. Not reaching this score either in connection with shortlisting, cf. section 3.9, or in connection with the tender evaluation (an evaluation leading to the award of the contract) will result in the ten der being excluded from the competition.

Time Schedule As a basis for the Contracting Authority’s evaluation of Time Schedule, the tenderers are asked to submit the following: • Identification of main milestones (e.g. design completion, start drilling, pilot hole, reaming, pull-back, completion) • Proposed timeline for achieving these milestones within the time frame of the contract • Consideration of required approvals, permits and hold points • Detailed schedule for engineering activities • Detailed schedule on deliverables and documentation • Detailed planning for site setup and maintenance • Detailed planning concept for all required activities needed to complete the HDD operations • Demonstration of continuous and efficient work sequence (minimizing downtime) • Clear distinction between onshore and offshore activities • Assessed weather downtime and standby • Contingencies shall be added and be visible in the time schedule Tenderer to submit a detailed time schedule that demonstrate the following information: The time schedule shall comprise of a GANTT-style time schedule in pdf and Microsoft Project format, as well as be accompanied with a pdf document describing the overall planning and logic behind the submitted time schedule, including the key phases from engineering to completion. It shall furthermore describe critical path and key dependencies. The following is evaluated positively: 1. Overall schedule structure and logic Degree to which the tenderer presents a clear, coherent and well-structured overall time schedule, including logical sequencing of activities from engineering to completion, well-defined milestones and a transparent critical path with key dependencies. 2. Feasibility and realism of timeline Degree to which the proposed timeline for achieving key milestones is realistic and feasible, taking into account the scope, complexity and constraints of the HDD works, including appropriate allocation of time for all main activities. 3. Planning of activities and resource coordination Degree to which the tenderer demonstrates detailed and well-coordinated planning of engineering, deliverables, site setup, HDD execution and related activities, including clear distinction and alignment between onshore and off shore works. 4. Risk consideration to the time schedule, contingencies and downtime Degree to which the time schedule reflects a robust approach to risk management, including consideration of required permits and approvals, weather down time, standby periods and clearly identified and adequate contingencies. 5. Efficiency and continuity of execution Degree to which the proposed schedule ensures an efficient and continuous work sequence, minimizing down time and idle periods, and demonstrating effective planning of critical HDD operations such as drilling, reaming and pull-back. An overall evaluation will be made of this sub-criterion. For the sub-criteria “Time Schedule” it is a minimum requirement that the tenderer reach a minimum score of 4 for the tender to be compliant. Not reaching this score either in connection with shortlisting, cf. section 3.9, or in connection with the tender evaluation (an evaluation leading to the award of the contract) will result in the tender being excluded from the competition.

Contract Terms For the evaluation of the sub-criteria “Contract terms" the tenderer may include a list of proposed deviations to the specified terms in the contractual documents which the Contracting Authority has identified as competitive criteria under “Evaluation and award stage”. Following contractual documents are included in the tender: • Particular Conditions Part A – Contract Data, doc. no. BEI-HDD-01-02 • Particular Conditions - Part B - Special Provisions, doc. no. BEI-HDD 01-03 • Conditions of Contract for Plant and Design-Build edition 2017 (FIDIC Yellow Book), doc. no. BEI-HDD-01-04 If the tenderer includes a list of proposed deviations to the contractual documents, these must be stated in the Clarification List (doc. no. 23/10647-9) under the relevant spreadsheet named in accordance with the above list of contractual documents included in the tender. Proposed deviations, if any, should be explicit and clear in content. The tendered assignment must be performed on the basis of the attached contractual documents. The tenderer may, however, suggest explicit and well-explained deviations to the terms which the Contracting Authority has identified as competitive terms below: In the Particular Conditions Part A – Contract Data, doc. no. BEI-HDD-01-02: 1. Sub-Clause 1.1.19 (Cost) - Percentage of overhead 2. Sub-Clause 1.1.20 (Cost Plus Profit) – Percentage of profit 3. Sub-Clause 1.1.27 (Defects Notification Period) – Number of years 4. Sub-Clause 1.9 (Errors in the Employer’s Requirements) – Number of days 5. Sub-Clause 1.15 (Limitation of Liability) – Percentage of the Contract Price 6. Sub-Clause 4.2 (Performance Security) – Percentage of performance security 7. Sub-Clause 4.7 (Setting Out) – Period for notification of errors 8. Clause 8.3 (Programme) – Withholding of payment 9. Clause 8.8 (Delay Damages) – The maximum amount of delay damages. 10. Sub-Clause 8.12 (Prolonged Suspension) – Maximum days of prolonged suspension In Particular Conditions - Part B - Special Provisions, doc. no. BEI-HDD-01-03 and Conditions of Contract (FIDIC Yellow Book), doc. no. BEI-HDD-01-04: 11. Sub-Clause 1.1.14 (Contractor’s Documents) 12. Sub-Clause 1.1.76A (Serial Defect Indication) 13. Sub-Clause 1.9 (Errors in the Employer’s Requirements) 14. Sub-Clause 1.9A Rely Upon Information – however the definition in 1.1.69A and Employers Requirements is not part of the evaluation. 15. Sub-Clause 1.10 (Employer’s Use of Contractor’s Documents) 16. Sub-Clause 1.12 (Confidentiality) 17. Sub-Clause 1.11 (Contractor’s use of Employer’s Documents) 18. Sub-Clause 1.15 (Limitation of Liability) 19. Sub-Clause 1.19 (Ownership of Resulting Data) 20. Sub-Clause 2.5 (Site Data and Items Reference) 21. Sub-Clause 2.7 (Audit Rights) 22. Sub-Clause 4.1 (Contractor’s general Obligations) 23. Sub-Clause 4.2 (Performance Security) – except for on-demand and rating of BBB, which is considered a requirement. 24. Sub-Clause 4.3 (Contractor’s Representative) 25. Sub-Clause 4.4 (Subcontractors) 26. Sub-Clause 4.6 (Co-operation) 27. Sub-Clause 4.7 (Setting Out) 28. Sub-Clause 4.10 (Use of Site Data) 29. Sub-Clause 4.12 (Unforeseeable Physical Conditions) 30. Sub-Clause 4.12A (Adverse Subsurface Conditions) 31. Sub-Clause 4.12B (Weather Downtime Offshore Works) 32. Sub-Clause 4.16 (Transport of Goods) 33. Sub-Clause 4.17 (Contractor’s Equipment) 34. Sub-Clause 4.21 (Security of the Site) 35. Clause 5 (Design) 36. Sub-Clause 6.9 (Contractor’s Personnel) 37. Sub-Clause 6.12, paragraph 7 (penalty under Key Personnel) 38. Sub-Clause 7.2 (Samples) 39. Sub-Clause 7.3 (Inspection) 40. Sub-Clause 7.7 (Ownership of Plant and Materials) 41. Clause 8 (Commencement, Delays and Suspension) - Except for Sub-Clause 8.8 (Delay Damages), which is considered a requirement. 42. Clause 9 (Test on Completion) 43. Clause 10 (Employer’s Taking Over) 44. Clause 11.12 (Serial Defects) 45. Sub-Clause 14.2 (Advance Payment) - except for on-demand and rating of BBB, which is considered a requirement. 46. Clause 15 (Termination by Employer) 47. Sub-Clause 16.2 (Termination by Contractor) 48. Clause 17 (Care of the Works and Indemnities) 49. Sub-Clause 18.4 (Consequences of an Exceptional Event) 50. Sub-Clause 18.3 (Duty to Minimise Delay) 51. Sub-Clause 18.5 (Optional Termination) As part of the tender process some clauses might change from competitive terms to requirements – or other clauses might be added as competitive terms. This shall be fixed be fore a tender leading to award of the contract. For the sub-criteria “Contract Terms” it is a minimum requirement that the tenderer reach a minimum score of 4 for the tender to be compliant. Not reaching this score either in connection with shortlisting, cf. section 3.9, or in connection with the tender evaluation (an evaluation leading to the award of the contract) will result in the tender being excluded from the competition.