HDD Landfall Bornholm -25/18035
Veg- og baneinfrastruktur
Energinet Eltransmission A/S har brug for op til 8 HDD-boringer fra ca. 250 meter inde i landet fra kystlinjen på Bornholm og ud til havet, inklusive klargøring af område og adgangsveje, konstruktion af HDD'er (inklusive onshore og offshore spreads), forsegling og retablering. Kontrakten løber i 3 år. Tildelingskriterierne er pris (40%), teknisk og organisatorisk løsning (40%), tidsplan (10%) og kontraktvilkår (10%). Kvalifikationskrav inkluderer en egenkapital på mindst 2.000.000 EUR og en egenkapitalandel på mindst 20% (eller 15-20% hvis egenkapitalen overstiger 6.000.000 EUR), samt en omsætning på mindst 10.000.000 EUR fra seneste årsrapport. Derudover kræves mindst én reference med HDD landfall-boring udført inden for de seneste 7 år med en kontraktværdi på mindst 5.000.000 EUR.
About the bid
- Contact name
- Procurement - A
- Contact phone
- 70102244
- Contact email
- procurement@energinet.dk
- Address
- Tonne Kjærsvej 65, 7000 Fredericia
The Contracting Authority wants to purchase up to 8 HDD Drilling from approximately 250 meters inland from the coastline on Bornholm, and out to the ocean. Scope also includes preparation of site and access roads, construction of HDDs (include onshore and offshore spreads), sealing and reinstatement For further details regarding the purchase, reference is made to the tender documents. The tendered contract starts when the contract is signed, and ends when the tendered assignment has been completed.Main features of the procedureThe tender is joint tender
Custom Assessment Criteria
Start a free trial to ask your own questions about the tender and get AI-generated answers.
Award Criteria
Description
Prices must be stated in the attached Price List and the defined price elements must be completed herein. Prices must be stated exclusive of VAT but inclusive of all other expenses associated with the purchase. Prices must be stated in EUR. When evaluating 'Price', the Contracting Authority will evaluate the total price for evaluation, cf. the Price List – Overview sheet.
Evaluation Method
The Contracting Authority will evaluate the total price for evaluation, cf. the Price List – Overview sheet.
Description
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.
Evaluation Method
The Technical Solution will be evaluated on the basis of the credibility, feasibility and level of detail of the submitted 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 successful project delivery, including performance in relation to time, quality, safety, and stakeholder management; 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 tender being excluded from the competition.
Description
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.
Evaluation Method
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 offshore 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 downtime 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.
Description
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 before 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.
Evaluation Method
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.
Qualification requirements
Description
Equity from the latest annual report must, at the time of prequalification, be at least 2,000,000 EUR.
Documentation Requirement
The applicant must confirm the economic ability in the ESPD part IV.B with information from the latest annual report regarding equity. If the applicant relies on the capacities of other entities or the applicant is a group of economic operators, the information for the ESPD part IV.B must also be given in a separate ESPD from each of these entities.
Description
Equity ratio from the latest annual report must, at the time of prequalification, be at least 20 pct. If the equity ratio is between 15 pct. and 20 pct. the applicant can qualify if Equity exceeds 6,000,000 EUR.
Documentation Requirement
The applicant must confirm the economic ability in the ESPD part IV.B with information from the latest annual report regarding equity ratio. This must be stated with two decimals. If the applicant relies on the capacities of other entities or the applicant is a group of economic operators, the information for the ESPD part IV.B must also be given in a separate ESPD from each of these entities.
Description
Turnover from the latest annual report must, at the time of prequalification, be at least 10,000,000 EUR.
Documentation Requirement
The applicant must confirm the economic ability in the ESPD part IV.B with information from the latest annual report regarding turnover. If the applicant relies on the capacities of other entities or the applicant is a group of economic operators, the information for the ESPD part IV.B must also be given in a separate ESPD from each of these entities.
Description
The applicant must have at least one reference with HDD landfall drilling, that meets the following requirements: - Undertaken within the past 7 years - Contract value of at least 5.000.000 EUR
Documentation Requirement
The ability will be assessed based on references which can be filled in ESPD part IV.C. The applicant is allowed to submit up to 3 most comparable and relevant references undertaken in the past 7 years as part of the application. The references should describe HDD drilling experience, and include: • A specific description of deliveries, including: - Length, diameter, width and depth of drilling - Types of crossings - Drilling system - Handling of frack outs - Incidents concerning HSE - Applicant’s concrete role in the (main/subcontractor) • Contract value (if possible) • Location • Date of initiation and final delivery (day, month, year) If the applicant is relying on the capacity of other entities or is part of a group of economic operators, the maximum number of references to be submitted must still be respected and cannot exceed 3 when combined. If more are submitted, the Contracting Authority will only consider the most recent references determined by date of final delivery, in this case not yet finished references will not be included. If the applicant relies on other entities’ capacity or is part of a group of economic operators, the information concerning ESPD part IV.C must be submitted in separate ESPDs for each entity.
Previous Contract Winners
Start a free trial to see who has won similar tenders for this buyer.
See the full notice
- Contracting authority
- Energinet Eltransmission A/S
- Title
- HDD Landfall Bornholm -25/18035
- Type
- Main code
- Supplemental codes
- Duration
- 3 years